Phil Gingrey

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. The gentleman from Arizona is absolutely right. One of the provisions that they stated in the letter is this, finally, any health care reform legislation that comes to the floor must be available to all Members and to the public for a sufficient amount of time before we are asked to vote for it.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I can respond to the gentleman from Arizona, absolutely, and again in this letter, and I'm quoting directly from the letter: too short of a review period is unacceptable and only undermines Congress' ability to pass responsible health care reform that works for all Americans. And our colleague from Tennessee, Dr. Roe, just held up that 1,100- page bill. I wonder when they are going to get around to reading it. And I yield back.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I am reading directly from that provision, taxes on employers and individuals.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I have read a portion of this bill.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman will continue to yield, and yet we are going to repeat this now on a grand national scale. I want to just take a few minutes to talk about what the Blue Dog Democrats said to their leadership just last week in a letter that was sent to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, Madam Speaker, and the Honorable Steny Hoyer, the majority leader of the Democrats. And 40--I think there are 52 Members of the Blue Dog Coalition of Democrats, those Members who are a little more conservative than the typical moderate to liberal Democrats, and basically these 40 Members, 40 out of 52, and there are a number of things in their letter, but I just want to go over a couple. One of the provisions that they say that absolutely needed fixing in this bill before they could support it is small business protections. Here is what it says: Any additional requirements for employers must be carefully considered and done so within the context of what is currently offered. Small business owners and their employees lack coverage because of high and unstable costs, not because of any unwillingness to provide or purchase it. We cannot support a bill that further exacerbates the challenges faced by small businesses. Now, look, my colleagues, what this bill says that just came out today, this is the burden, the additional burden that will be put on small businesses. If the payroll of a business does not exceed $250,000, then there is no surtax. But if the payroll exceeds $250,000 to $300,000, there is a 2 percent surtax. If the payroll exceeds $350,000 but does not exceed $400,000, there is a 6 percent tax on small business, and if the payroll exceeds only $400,000, there is an 8 percent surtax on these small businesses. What I want to make sure everybody in this Chamber understands is that these small businesses are not subchapter; they are not C corporations. They are Subchapter S or they are sole proprietors. And they pay as an individual. And this is on top of the fact that President Obama is going to let the tax cuts expire that President Bush put in place in 2001 and 2003.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank my colleague for yielding. It is a pleasure to be on the floor with my colleagues talking about this bill that was finally, as we all know, introduced by Speaker Pelosi at a press conference this afternoon. And hearing our colleagues from Tennessee talk about really the ultimate pilot project, we are always in Medicare, anytime they are trying to do something to improve a situation, we start with a pilot project, which makes sense. Well, this was the ultimate pilot project, I think, this TennCare that Congresswoman Blackburn and Dr. Roe, Congressman Roe, have described to us; and as their Democratic Governor said, it was a complete abysmal failure.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, after losing an additional 467,000 jobs last month, our Nation's unemployment rate reached a 25- year high of 9.5 percent. It is time for the administration and the Democratic majority to admit what the American people know all too well: the vaunted Democratic stimulus bill has failed to stimulate anything other than a few Federal bureaucrats and the Chinese, who are loaning us, with hefty interest, I might add, those stimulus dollars. When President Obama and the Democratic leadership rammed the 1,073- page stimulus bill through Congress without giving Representatives on either side of the aisle, much less voters back home, a chance to actually read it, they promised that the $1 trillion price tag would go to ``saving or creating 3.5 million jobs.'' Well, Madam Speaker, I must ask the question, Where are the jobs? To make matters worse, the House passed the ``Pelosi Global Warming Tax'' 2 weeks ago that will only make it harder for businesses and families to survive by piling an additional $3,000 on to every household's energy bill. This cap-and-tax policy, they call it cap-and- trade, but it is a cap-and-tax policy, would further impose artificial emissions standards on American companies and energy producers, increasing the cost of doing business and forcing them to cede market share to overseas competitors who will not be subject to these limits on carbon dioxide emissions. I repeat: they will not be subject to these limits, and I'm talking, of course, about China and India. And now the same people who turned General Motors into ``Government Motors'' have set their sights on a government-controlled health care system that gives power to bureaucrats rather than doctors, like myself, to make decisions about your care. As we have seen in Great Britain and Canada, the end result would be the virtual elimination of private health insurance and the creation of a one-size-fits-all government health plan that would ration care by limiting the types of treatments patients can receive. Madam Speaker, instead of another government takeover, we need real solutions which will make health care more affordable and more accessible while leaving critical choices and decisions about their health where they belong, in the hands of patients and their physicians.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I stand to strongly oppose this rule on the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act of 2010. Mr. Speaker, this is unconscionable, what the Democrat majority is doing regarding these appropriations bills. I think this is about the fourth or fifth appropriation bill that we brought to the floor with a structured rule, and this has never happened, to my knowledge, in the history of this Congress. These should be open rules so that every Member, not just members of the Appropriations Committee, the 40 or 50 members that study these bills, but every single Member of this body who represent 675,000 people across this country and these 50 States should have an opportunity to offer amendments. I have offered 10 amendments to these five bills. Not one, not one, Mr. Speaker, has been made in order, and not one of these amendments are dilatory. As an example, on this particular bill, the Veterans Administration Appropriation, I have an amendment that says no party, no Republican or Democratic majority should hold that bill hostage once it passes to put it in the form of a minibus, combine it with some other legislation to pass something that we don't want to pass, and hold our veterans hostage so that they don't get the pay raise they need, they don't get the benefits they need, they don't get the health care they need. That, Mr. Speaker, is unconscionable. For that reason I stand strongly opposed to this rule. The rule should be open, and the chairman of the Appropriations Committee knows that, and I challenge him to bring these bills to the floor in an open fashion, which we have always done on both sides of the aisle. It is time to end this mendacity and this unconscionable activity. Let's all vote against this rule. Let's send it back. Let's bring forward an open rule and a fair process so that veterans in every congressional district across these 50 States will have an opportunity to be heard.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I realize we are running short on time, but I just wanted to comment on the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Fleming's resolution. Mr. Speaker, it would be akin to a member of a public school board, let's say in your own community or in my community. In fact, I was on a public school board, and do you think I would have had the audacity to have my children enrolled in a private school while I served on the local public school board? Absolutely not. All four of my children went to that public school. It wasn't a perfect school, but it was my job to make it perfect, as perfect as I could. And so for this Democratic majority, and this President, I would take it a step further than what Dr. Fleming said. I would say to the President, and to Mrs. Obama and to the children, you know, Sign up for this public health plan, because you are purporting it to be the best thing since sliced bread, better than any private, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, WellPoint, whatever is out there in the private market. This is a wonderful hour, and I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for bringing up this commonsense point.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for organizing the hour tonight and for bringing this important issue before the Members of this body and the American people. Of course, as my colleagues have said, next week in the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, the Education and Labor Committee of this House, markups are going to begin on this bill. So we are at the dividing point where people need to understand what this is all about. And as my colleague from Texas said, yes, we have formed a Doctors Caucus on the Republican side. We asked the Members of the Democratic side who are also health care providers to join that group. They declined. But we have a group of about 14, including a number of doctors who are on the floor tonight participating in this special hour, with over 330 years of clinical health care experience and has any one of that group--and in that group, I think we're talking about 10 or 11 physicians. We're talking about an optometrist, a clinical psychologist and three dentists. And not one of those Members, Mr. Speaker, has been asked to participate in the drafting and crafting of legislation that would improve the health care system that we have in this country. And when I talk about improvement, I mean exactly that, Mr. Speaker. We do not need to destroy a good system. We need to make it better, and we can do that. That's why the District of Columbia Medical Society at George Washington Hospital this week invited this group of physicians, this group of health care providers to come and be on a panel and to answer questions from their doctors, from employees of the hospital, from nurses, from people from all walks of life, really, to let's talk about this issue and give an opportunity for another town hall meeting. President Obama had one with ABC or NBC, one of the major networks, coming from the White House, but it was totally one-sided. So as my colleagues have said, we can fix this system. We can do it. We don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water, as the old expression goes. We feel that if there are 10 million people in this country who cannot afford health insurance or are denied it because of a pre- existing condition, that's too many. There are a number of things that we can do, and I will just briefly mention a couple. Clearly we can agree with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle with regard to the efficacy and money-saving aspects of electronic medical records. I would hope that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle could agree with us that meaningful tort reforms, where doctors weren't constantly having to order just tons of unnecessary tests, and hospitals doing the same thing, knowing that they're unnecessary and maybe downright harmful to the patient. But with this fear, this constant fear of frivolous lawsuits facing them, all this extra money is spent for naught. So these are just a couple of things that we can do. Certainly the insurance industry, the health insurance industry needs to reform. There are a number of things that they could do, and hopefully later in the hour we can get back to that. But I think the most important thing for our colleagues and the American people to understand is that we do have the best health care system in the world, and we have the capability of coming together in a bipartisan way. My colleagues who have already spoken have plans, have bills that they've worked on for years. But do they get to see the light of day? Absolutely not. The President and this majority is so focused on this public plan. One of my colleagues is going to speak in a few minutes; and he is going to talk about, Well, since that public option is so darn good, then maybe President Obama, Mrs. Obama and those two precious children ought to be on that public option plan rather than a Blue Cross/Blue Shield or some other Federal Employees Health Benefits plan. If it's good enough for the general public, it ought to be good enough for Members of Congress. I may be stealing somebody else's thunder. At this point I will yield back to my colleague from Texas, as he continues to control this time.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today, the residents of Adairsville, Georgia, in my district, the 11th, are saying good-bye to a local hero who died while bravely serving his Nation in Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Seth Sharp was killed in action on July 2, 2009, from a gunshot wound to his neck during one of the biggest United States military operations in Afghanistan since the global war on terror began back in 2001. Later this week, I will join Seth's family, his friends and supporters at his funeral in honor of the life of this brave soldier, a life given as the ultimate sacrifice, a sacrifice of duty and love. For, as it is written in John, ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' This was not Seth's first deployment in the global war on terror. He enlisted with the Marines at age 17 and was serving his Nation in Iraq at age 18. Even at such a young age, Seth embraced the challenge of the Marine Corps and took pride in serving his country. His service and his sacrifice will never be forgotten. Lance Corporal Sharp leaves behind his fiancee and lifelong sweetheart, Katie McMahon; his father and his stepmother, Rick and Tiffany Sharp of Adairsville, Georgia; his mother, Angela Preston of Alligator Point, Florida; as well as many other close relatives and friends spread out all across the country. Mr. Speaker, my prayers go out to his family, and my most heartfelt gratitude goes out to Lance Corporal Seth Sharp for his selfless sacrifice for this Nation. I ask all Members to please join me in honoring the distinguished memory of Lance Corporal Seth Sharp.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding. With all due respect to my colleague from Oregon, my former chairman of the Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation, I do rise in opposition to this rule. I had an amendment that would have addressed my concerns. While I am generally supportive of the bill, I have some concerns relating to venture capital involvement, and unfortunately, the rule does not provide for any commonsense amendment offered by Members on both sides of the aisle that would address these concerns. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo) spoke just a few minutes ago, a former chairman of the Small Business Committee, about these same concerns. Venture capital helps small business entrepreneurs gain credibility on solid ideas that have the potential for commercialization. However, while venture capital serves as an important component in facilitating small business success, it must also be closely monitored and scrutinized. Because these grants are intended, Mr. Speaker, for small business research and development, we must ensure that venture capital does not represent a majority of the financial interest within the company of SBIR applicants. Existing law and regulation limits a single venture capital firm from owning 49 percent of the interests of the company applying for the grant. This bill leaves open the possibility that multiple venture capital firms could own the majority of the financial interests within the company. Anyone could own up to 30 percent, or they could own 90 percent of the company. So I believe this goes against the spirit of the program, Mr. Speaker. The SBIR program is designed to provide assistance to a small business that may have an idea that can be considered a diamond in the rough without necessarily having financial backing to bankroll a promising idea. We had hearings on this issue, and venture capitalists came before us, and they were in the business of, it seemed to me, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, of churning this program, and I just had great concerns about that. I think overall it is a good program. Mr. Polis, you can put me down as supporting the program with all those other organizations that you mentioned, but we should have improved this. We should have had better oversight on venture capital.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks as well as in accordance with Clause 9 of rule XXI, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2997, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey Bill Number: H.R. 2997 Account: Department of Agriculture; Natural Resources Conservation Service, Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Paulding County (GA) Board of Commissioners Address of Requesting Entity: 240 Constitution Boulevard, Dallas, GA 30132 Description of Request: The project will be a pump-fill reservoir located within the upper reaches of Richland Creek in northern Paulding County, Georgia. The funding granted in H.R. 2997 is to be used for engineering and design services for the dam structure and appurtenances, raw water withdrawal station, raw water pipeline, and for mitigation purposes. Richland Creek Reservoir is a public water supply reservoir that is being proposed to fulfill Paulding County's water supply needs for the next 50 years. As Richland Creek has a small drainage basin, a raw water intake structure and pipeline must be constructed on the Etowah River to supply water to the 4.4 billion gallon reservoir. According to our 50-year water needs projections, Paulding County will need approximately 62 million gallons per day (MGD). Currently, Paulding County purchases 100% of its potable water from Cobb County-Marietta Water Authority (CCMWA). CCMWA has in its long-term plan to be able to supply Paulding with up to 27 MGD leaving an unmet need for Paulding County of 35 MGD. Richland Creek Reservoir is expected to fulfill the unmet water supply need of 35 million gallons per day (MGD) for Paulding County. The $100,000 added to H.R. 2997 will be used in its entirety for Surveying, Engineering Studies & Permitting for the reservoir to help fulfill the water needs of Paulding County.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 131, a resolution urging the Architect of the Capitol to engrave the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and the National Motto of ``In God We Trust'' in the Capitol Visitor Center. The Pledge of Allegiance is an excellent example of national solidarity for all Americans and the foremost demonstration of America as ``one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all.'' These words illustrate an eternal commitment to a nation unified by a common history, identity, and Constitution. The Pledge further represents that if God gives you a right, then no man should have the power to take it away. This is the premise of our nation, our rights, and our system of law, and it must be upheld in an effort to never lose sight of the fact that we are bound together as one nation--common in purpose-- endeavoring to provide an open and free democracy for all of mankind. ``In God We Trust'' was codified as our national motto in 1956 in recognition of the Judeo-Christian values upon which our nation is founded. Faith has always been a very important part of American history and culture, and I believe that it is imperative to uphold this cornerstone of our heritage to preserve the rights of all Americans to worship freely and openly. I am proud that my home state of Georgia has recognized ``God'' in its own Constitution and seeks to maintain a reliance on faith in God as one of its founding principles. Mr. Speaker, I want to make clear that the Pledge of Allegiance and our national motto are two public illustrations of the values to which we hold firmly in America. These two principles are demonstrated in this very chamber by our opening of each legislative day with prayer and by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. One need look no further than behind the chair of the Speaker of this great body to see the inscription of ``In God We Trust.'' These two testaments of our founding must remain the stronghold of American values and continue to be espoused in every public meeting. Therefore, it is with great pride and honor that I stand here today to advocate for the engraving of the Pledge of Allegiance and our national motto in the newly constructed Capitol Visitor Center. Displaying these two documents prominently in an open arena for all tourists and citizens is just one more reminder of the founding and enduring principles of our nation, of which we must be reminded daily. As lawmakers, we must never cease to instill the doctrine of democracy and freedom of religion for the entire world, and by displaying these words in our nation's capitol we are only reaffirming our dedication to this endeavor. I urge all of colleagues to support this resolution and to hold steadfast to the values upon which our great nation was founded.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and to the underlying legislation. I am just not sure to which I am more opposed. Americans are watching, as from Iran to North Korea, the forces of darkness are attempting to silence the voices of democracy and freedom. The irony is, on this day, the democratic process and our Nation's economic freedom are under threat, not by some rogue state but in this very Chamber in which we stand. Good people may disagree on the impact of the merits of this bill, but no one can disagree with the fact that the Speaker and our Rules Committee have silenced the opposition of 224 amendments. Madam Speaker, one, and I repeat, one amendment was actually made in order. Madam Speaker, I offered an amendment which was, of course, not made in order, that would have allowed a State to opt out of this legislation. How can we not give them the ability to say that their citizens and their businesses simply cannot afford this Pelosi global warming tax? For some of them, this bill will be an economic death sentence. And yet, Madam Speaker, this House will not have a chance to vote on this amendment or any of the other 222. They were banned from being debated and voted upon in this, the people's House. I call upon every Member of this House, oppose and defeat this rule, not just for the sake of the democratic process, but for the sake of our Nation's economy.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, as we consider H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, I would like to say a special thanks to Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon-- as well as to subcommittee Chairman Abercrombie and Ranking Member Bartlett--for their tireless efforts in support of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who are bravely defending us at home and abroad. While not a perfect bill, this legislation covers a wide scope of issues that are vitally important to our Armed Services, both active and reserve component, and it clearly addresses the most pressing needs of our troops in a very trying time for America. A 3.4% pay raise for all members of the Armed Forces will further reduce the military- civilian pay disparity. I am very pleased with the work the Committee has done this year to authorize $368 million for the advance procurement of long-lead supplies needed to build 12 additional F-22's in 2011. The F-22 is the world's most capable fighter, and these funds will go a long way towards providing stability for our forces and ensuring that America maintains air dominance for the foreseeable future. While I applaud the work of the Committee in addressing pressing readiness issues, I am however concerned about the deep cuts to missile defense. A viable missile defense system is critical to deterring and countering emerging threats to our national security--especially as Iran and North Korea develop their nuclear capabilities. I look forward to working with Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member McKeon, and the rest of the Committee as this bill moves forward to address these program needs. While there is much to be proud of in this bill, I am disappointed that the Rules Committee failed to make any of my four amendments in order. These were commonsense amendments, Mr. Chair, that would make the Department of Defense (DoD) more effective in carrying out its mission. The first amendment I offered to this bill would have ensured that no detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility are transported to the United States. The American people have spoken on this issue with 55% of them opposed to allowing terrorists to be transported to American soil. Further, a June 12, 2009 letter from the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to my colleague, Trent Franks, stated that ``there is insufficient bed space in any high-security Federal prison to confine these individuals. In addition, there are currently no beds available in our Administrative Maximum United States Penitentiary in Florence, Colorado, to confine any more Federal inmates, let alone any of the Guantanamo Bay detainees. If called upon to confine any of these detainees, we would most likely confine them in ADX Florence and in one or more high-security penitentiaries. Depending on the numbers, this might require us to transfer a sufficient number of inmates to other penitentiaries in order to create the necessary bed space. Such transfers would impose significant additional challenges on our agency.'' Clearly the transfer of these detainees to anywhere in America is dangerous and must be prohibited. My second amendment would express the sense of Congress that active military personnel who live in or are stationed in Washington, DC, would be exempt from the District's firearms restrictions. On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States in the case, District of Columbia v. Heller, held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, and thus, ruled that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirements that rifles and shotguns in the home be kept unloaded and disassembled or outfitted with a trigger lock to be unconstitutional. However, the D.C. City Council has circumvented the Supreme Court ruling by enacting the Firearms Control Emergency Amendment Act of 2008, making a waiver necessary to ensure that our military men and women--of which there are 40,000 in Washington and who have been trained in firearm use--are permitted to safely carry a firearm in the District. A further amendment would prohibit DoD civilian employees from using official paid work time for union activities, ensuring that American taxpayers are not subsidizing labor organizations. DoD was one of the largest abusers of using ``official time'' for union activity. Its total number of official time hours in FY 2008 was 331,099 (a 5.1% increase from FY 2007). OPM estimated the official time wage cost for the DoD was $12,141,699 for FY 2008, which is an $855,694 increase from FY 2007. This is just one example of union activity being subsidized by taxpayer dollars on official time. My final amendment would have provided the Secretary of Defense with a waiver from section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 regarding the procurement of alternative fuels if the Secretary feels that a waiver is appropriate to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces. Section 526 prohibits all federal agencies from contracting for alternative fuels that emit higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions than ``conventional petroleum sources.'' DoD accounts for over 80% of all federal government fuel usage, and its annual fuel expense more than doubled between 2003 and 2007--from $5.2 billion to $12.6 billion. The Secretary of Defense needs a waiver from section 526 so that DoD's fuel costs can be kept low. Mr. Chair, there is much to be proud of in this bill. I again commend Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon for their efforts to keep this bill focused on the needs of the war-fighter, a fact that I hope is not lost as we progress through the amendment process.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks as well as in accordance with Clause 9 of Rule XXI, I am submitting the following information regarding the earmark I received as part of H.R. 2996, the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Phil Gingrey Bill Number: H.R. 2996 Account: Environmental Protection Agency; STAG Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District Address of Requesting Entity: 40 Courtland Street, NE Atlanta, GA 30303 Description of Request: The $500,000 in STAG funding secured will be applied to this list of the Water District projects: Cobb County Sweetwater Creek Sanitary Sewer Extension--This proposed extension of the Sweetwater Creek interceptor will provide gravity sewer service to much of the unsewered portion of southwestern Cobb County, including several dry sewer subdivisions. It will also extend service into the Sweetwater basin in Paulding County, eliminating the need for an additional treatment facility and comporting with our regional plan. The project includes about 20,000 linear feet of large diameter sewer. Estimated cost of this project is $7,700,000. Mack Dobbs Road Water Main Replacement--Replacement of 11,200 linear feet of existing 6-inch asbestos cement water main with 12-inch ductile iron between Cobb Parkway and Stilesboro Road. Estimated cost of this project is $1,200,000. Low Flow Toilet and Urinal Retrofit for 127 Cobb County Public Schools--A water conservation project which consists of replacing approximately 5,782 older, inefficient toilets and urinals and 2,478 miscellaneous faucets and pre-rinse spray valves in Cobb County Schools. The estimated cost of this project is $875,000. Cobb County-Marietta Water Authority The Cobb County-Marietta Water Authority (CCMWA), a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, is a regional water wholesaler with 13 customers that serve over 790,000 people. The customers include Cobb County, all of the municipalities within Cobb County, all of Paulding County, portions of Douglas County, Cherokee County, the City of Woodstock, and a small community in Fulton County. Austell West Side Connector 24''--This pipeline project installs 8,000 feet of 24'' ductile iron pipe to connect existing transmission lines. The pipeline will improve system flow capacity and provide redundancy to Cobb Hospital and high growth area along East-West Connector. The estimated cost of this project is $2,549,800. Five Million Gallon Steel Tank at Lost Mountain--This tank will provide enhanced fire protection. It will also increase system reliability by improving storage-to-production ratio and source water reliability for existing pump station. It will provide additional water storage for west Cobb County and Paulding County. The estimated cost of this project is $3,500,000. Five Million Gallon Steel Tank at Pete Shaw--This tank will provide enhanced fire protection. It will also increase system reliability by improving storage-to-production ratio. This tank will provide additional water storage capacity to east Cobb County. The estimated cost of this project is $3,500,000. Columns Drive Pipe Replacement--Replacement of approximately 600 linear feet of 36'' ductile iron pipe with 54'' restrained joint ductile iron pipe. This installation will eliminate a restriction in the main line from the Quarles Water Treatment Plant. The estimated cost of this project is $780,600. Hall County Low Flow Toilet and Urinal Retrofit for Hall County Government Facilities--A water conservation project which consists of replacing all older, inefficient toilets and urinals in County facilities not already fitted with low flow systems including; Parks, Fire Stations, Senior Centers, Prisons, etc. The estimated cost of this project is $190,000. The City of Gainesville Flat Creek Watershed Improvement Plan and Ecosystem Restoration--The City of Gainesville and Hall County have developed a watershed improvement and ecosystem restoration plan for the Flat Creek watershed which includes several projects involving stream restoration and construction of storm water best management practices. The City is currently designing the Upper Flat Creek Stream Restoration and Regional Stormwater Detention Pond project. The estimated cost of this project is $700,000. Other projects we are moving forward with would cost approximately $2,000,000. Gainesville/Hall County Water Main Extensions and Improvements projects--These projects include approximately 25 miles of 8"-20" water line extensions/improvements throughout Gainesville/Hall County. Projects will extend water service to new customers and improve fire and water service by installing fire hydrants in new locations and improving flow capacity and quality in the water distribution system. The cost of these projects is estimated to be $13,200,000. Rockdale County Water Resources Distribution Waterline Replacements--A water conservation project to significantly reduce or eliminate unaccounted for water (i.e. reducing water leaks in public water supply distribution system). Estimated cost of this project is $15,000,000. Wastewater Pump Station--To prevent sewer overflows and upgrade pumping station to meet current demands in a concentrated area. Estimated cost of this project is $300,000. The City of Locust Grove Water Supply Wells--The City of Locust Grove has drilled two additional wells for drinking water supply. These wells have already been drilled and permitted by GA EPD. The wells are needed to help supply enough water for current demand. The design has already been drawn. Estimated cost of this project is $250,000. The City of Roswell Municipal Buildings Water Conservation Project--The condition of Roswell's municipal building restroom facilities vary widely in age, use, quality and repair. An initial assessment of the restrooms found 106 urinals, 295 toilets and 265 faucets to replace. The proposed water conservation project will purchase and install high-efficiency urinals, and toilets for the City's administrative, public safety, public-works, recycling center and park buildings. Additionally the project could include low-flow faucets, eco-friendly sanitizer systems and to minimize restroom vandalism and maintenance the installation of stainless steel panels, new and replacement tile. The estimated cost for this project is $500,000. The City of Alpharetta North Park Improvements: Construct off-line sediment forebay--A sediment forebay will allow silt to fall out in a confined area just prior to the lake. During non-storm flows, the creek will flow naturally into the lake. When it rains and the creek rises, water will be diverted to the forebay. The forebay will slow down the water, allowing time for much of the silt to fall out before discharging back into the lake. The forebay will be much easier to clean out than the lake itself. North Park Improvements: Construct three enhanced swales to treat water coming from the softball fields and two parking lots--Enhanced swales are state recognized water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) that allow for more water to infiltrate and be treated prior to entering the creek. As part of the installation of the enhanced swales, the water from these areas will be diverted to directly enter the lake instead of entering upstream through very eroded gullies. The gullies are so large that it is actually more cost effective to install the BMPs and divert the flow than it would be to repair the gullies, which are over 20 feet deep in some areas. North Park Improvements: Modify the outlet control structure of the lake--The current outlet structure of the lake clogs in nearly every storm event, requiring parks maintenance personnel to have to remove debris to restore drainage. The outlet control structure can be modified to reduce clogging and provide improved water quality benefits for the lake. This will reduce necessary maintenance and give the lake an overall better aesthetic appearance. Total cost for these improvements is: $517,818.75. This price includes the cost to prepare conceptual and final design; construction of three improvements/BMPS; and model pollutant removal.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, we are at a crossroads. Our Nation faces significant challenges, with unemployment nearing 10 percent and trillion-dollar deficits piling up decades of debt for our children and our grandchildren. However, congressional Democrats should not be so shortsighted to think that we cannot make a bad situation significantly worse by enacting legislation like this bill that will only knock more Americans off the assembly line and into the unemployment line. This bill will impose the Pelosi Global Warming Tax on every single American household and business, raising home electricity costs and annual energy costs by almost $3,000 for every family, and the only reduction will be in our Nation's gross domestic product by almost $10 trillion and in the number of Americans employed by the millions. Madam Speaker, Washington cannot save this country. Only the American people and American ingenuity can. Unfortunately, congressional Democrats have already allowed the Federal Government to take over our banking industry, the automobile industry, and now this House may very well vote to take over America's energy, with control over health care not far behind. Let's stop the insanity and wake up to the reality imposed in the Global Pelosi Warming Tax and, in the words of another Californian, our distinguished former first lady, Nancy Reagan: Just say no.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, even though my former Rules Committee colleague and I couldn't disagree more when it comes to WHINSEC, he is my good friend and I always look forward to our spirited debates on this matter. Predictably, I rise today to take issue with his amendment. The gentleman has stated today and in the past that the information on the WHINSEC students and instructors is always made available but that since 2005 disclosure and transparency have been lacking. To be clear, Mr. Chairman, the Department of Defense has provided to Congress the names, country of origin, and rank, courses, and dates of attendance of all students and instructors at WHINSEC since the year 2005. Since we already know exactly who is attending WHINSEC, I am led to wonder, Mr. Chairman, what is the McGovern amendment trying to accomplish? Unfortunately, I believe that the release of personal information has less to do with transparency and more to do with the efforts to shut WHINSEC down, something that this Congress has repeatedly rejected. If transparency is the issue, Mr. Chairman, WHINSEC is open to visitors every working day. It invites people to sit in class, talk with the students, talk with the faculty, and review instructional material. This is perhaps the most open, transparent, and welcoming organization in the Department of Defense. Mr. McGovern has also stated in the past that from time to time WHINSEC PR materials include pictures of students and instructors, so why the need to protect the identities of attendees? While this may be true, these are not the materials that end up in the mailboxes of narcotraffickers and drug lords in Central and South America; however, these criminals do search the Internet for the names of law enforcement personnel who stand in their way. I would also note there's a big difference between the voluntary and involuntary publishing of the names of the WHINSEC participants. Obviously, an attendee who is an undercover counterdrug officer would be more reticent to have his or her name posted on a Web site than would someone who has since become a high-ranking public official. Mr. Chairman, every Member of this body should know that WHINSEC is an invaluable tool for military-to-military cooperation between us, the United States, and Latin America and is a vital means for strengthening security cooperation in the region. Publicizing the names of WHINSEC students in their home countries could very well lead to hostile attention from nations, organizations, and individuals that may wish to do harm to the U.S., its friends and its allies. Such publications could serve as a disincentive to Central and South American, and Mexican, yes, Mexican students who otherwise want to attend WHINSEC and could discourage nations from sending their students to the school. It would undercut the effectiveness of WHINSEC as a tool for building hemispheric security cooperation and communicating the democratic values and respect for human rights we espouse. If our ability to influence the democratic trajectory of the region were diminished, it would be countries like Venezuela and China that would fill the void.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I therefore believe this amendment could potentially do much more harm than good, and I ask all my colleagues to oppose it.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I do rise in support of Representative Connolly's amendment, but this amendment, Mr. Chairman, doesn't go nearly far enough. Let me try to explain in the limited time that I have. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 has in it a section 526, which does not allow any agency of the Federal Government to use a fuel source that has one scintilla increased amount of carbon dioxide footprint other than just standard old bubble-up petroleum. The Department of Defense uses about 350,000 barrels of refined petroleum product every day, most of that by the Air Force in the use of jet fuel. In this country, we have so much domestic source of nonconventional bubble-up petroleum, and I'm talking about things like shale, in particular, and the liquefication of coal, converting coal into petroleum. In this country, Mr. Chairman, we probably have a 150-year reserve of coal, and yet we cannot touch that even though the Department of Defense has done research on the clean liquefication of coal, the clean mining of shale. Shale is a rock that's just soaked, it's like a sponge, it's just soaked with petroleum, and there are literally hundreds of millions of barrels of petroleum within that shale. And yet, because of this section 526 in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, we cannot use it. We cannot use that at all. So what we have found, of course, is that most of the petroleum that we import from foreign countries is not coming from OPEC; it's coming from Canada. And what's the problem? That oil that we get from Canada comes from tar sand. It's got a little sand in it, and it causes a little increase of production of carbon dioxide, a footprint that's more than conventional petroleum. So that's all the amendment does from the gentleman from Virginia. I support the amendment, but what we need to do is eliminate section 526. And I have an amendment that I signed on with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and the other gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), and that's what we should have done. That amendment should have been made in order. We need to eliminate section 526 and take the handcuffs off the Department of Defense. We're talking about big bucks here, Mr. Chairman. I do support the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Just briefly, that is exactly right, that people in these 435 congressional districts, Republican or Democrat, they need to know how their Member would vote on an issue such as that, something that important to this country in this time, they need an opportunity to hear that debate on this floor. You know, up or down, they need to know how their Member votes, and the point made by the gentleman from Texas is absolutely on target, and I just wanted to emphasize that.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman. We were just before the Rules Committee, Mr. Speaker, submitting an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act of 2010, our National Defense Authorization Act, something like $525 billion. But $1.2 billion, as the gentleman from Texas was alluding to, was cut from the missile defense program. It was cut from the missile defense program at a time when Kim Jong Il is firing missiles and testing nuclear weapons, violating the nuclear test ban treaty. And our intelligence is telling us, as the gentleman from Texas just said, that these ballistic missiles that they're testing could reach Hawaii. Well, we are getting that information, Mr. Speaker, not necessarily from the CIA but from all of our intelligence agencies. Heck, there are 16 of them, and most of them are within the Department of Defense. The Defense Intelligence Agency is an example. And, of course, we have a National Intelligence Director, which was insisted upon by the 9/11 Commission and the families of the victims. So, you know, it seems now to me, Mr. Speaker, that we are kind of getting a little loosey-goosey about all this stuff and thinking gosh, you know, the Speaker of the House said that the CIA lies. You can't trust them. So maybe that's why we are so ready to cut missile defense. We don't believe the intelligence.

Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. If the gentleman would yield.