Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Again, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for coming down tonight and talking again about how the Democrat majority, unfortunately, seems to speak out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to pork barrel spending that is taking away from the paychecks of hardworking middle-income families so that Members of Congress can somehow keep their paychecks. It is unfair. And there's a big difference between the two parties. The Democrat party said they would do something about it. And they did. They put the pork barrel spending factory into high gear. The Republicans made mistakes when it came to earmark spending. That is one of the reasons that we lost in 2006. But, Madam Speaker, we have learned our lesson. And that's why the Republican Conference supports a moratorium, a moratorium on this pork barrel spending, do away with this system and come up with a system that is more transparent and more accountable to the American people. The Democrat majority hasn't called for anything like that. They are just doing fine taking money away from middle-income families struggling to put food on the table, struggling to fill up their cars and pickup trucks, take that money away and spend it on monuments themselves and spend it on special interest favors for special interest groups. It has got to stop. Madam Speaker, another great leader we have in the earmark reform movement in the United States House of Representatives, another fellow member of the Conservative Caucus of the Republican Study Committee is the gentlelady from North Carolina. And I am happy to yield time to her at this time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. HENSARLING. Well, as a matter of fact, we have clearly documented that earlier this evening, and it's not just us saying it, The New York Times has said it, and I quote again, ``Representative John Murtha has procured eye-popping chunks of pork for contractors he helped put in business in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.'' ``Every one of the 26 beneficiaries of Mr. Murtha's earmarks in last year's defense budget made contributions to his campaign kitty, a total of $413,250,'' this from the New York Times. If the gentleman will allow me, again, under this Democrat majority, what we see too often is that Members of Congress direct earmarks to special interest recipients. They turn around and give campaign donations to the campaign, and then the campaign helps re-elect the Member of Congress, and the cycle goes over and over under this Democrat majority.

Mr. HENSARLING. If the gentleman would yield, it's a good time to point out again what a difference there is between the two political parties on this issue. The Democrats claim they would cut these earmarks in half but they didn't do it. Instead we end up with the second highest number of pork-barrel spending earmarks that we have seen in the history of America. They claim no more secrecy in the process. Yet we know that we have secret earmarks come in to benefit a select number of hospitals. It has been well documented. They claim they would bring integrity to the system, and yet we continue to see earmarks coming out of this end of Washington D.C., and we see campaign contributions coming in the other end. How convenient. Then they claimed that we can't continue to tax, we can't continue to have bridges of nowhere for America's children to pay for, but apparently we can have museums to honor Democrat Members of Congress, apparently we can have money going to the so-called Hippie Museum. Apparently we can send money to help the L.A. fashion district with their signage and streetscape improvements. The Republican Party has called for a moratorium on earmarks. This process needs to be reformed. The Democrat Party likes the status quo as it is. The leader of our party takes no earmarks. The leader of their party claims she would just as soon do without them; and instead, she is in the top 20 recipients of earmarks. The Republican presidential candidate says I will veto any spending bill with an earmark. And you look at their two presidential candidates, one is in the top 10, and the other, although only in the bottom half, has still managed $91 million of pork-barrel spending. To add her perspective, I am happy we are joined by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), and I yield to her at this time.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I first come here somewhat amused at the lecture that some of us received from the majority leader last evening on abuse of process. I hear many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say that we have a housing crisis and that this is one of the single most important bills to come to this floor in this Congress. And yet here we are, as the minority, not being allowed any amendments, not being allowed a substitute, not being allowed a motion to recommit, not even being allowed to have an up-or-down vote on the bill. And we're accused of an abusive process? But enough of that. Let's look at the substance of this. There is a great challenge in our housing markets. There is no doubt about it. And there are innocent people who have suffered, and they deserve to be helped. But this is the wrong plan. What we need to do, Mr. Speaker, is, number one, we have to have better disclosure so that people understand the economic obligations they're undertaking. We need to enforce the laws that we have on the books. Mortgage fraud has been rampant on both the borrowers' side and on the lenders' side. We need to prevent the automatic tax increase that has been included in the majority's budget that's going to impose a $3,000-a-year on the average American family tax increase phased in over the next 3 years. We need to do something about the skyrocketing cost of gasoline and food that has occurred on the watch of the majority. They've been in charge of the economic policies of this country for almost 18 months. The shrinking American paycheck is our challenge. A huge bailout of Wall Street and borrowers, some who may be innocent victims and some who may be guilty, is not the answer, and using taxpayers' money to do it is simply an insult. Number one, we ought to have the facts before we actually take on a major piece of legislation. The American people need to know. Over half of America rents their homes or owns their home outright. Of those who have an active mortgage, 95 percent are making their mortgage payments on time. You have roughly 2 percent who are in foreclosure. So now we're being asked essentially for 98 percent of America to bail out 2 percent of America. Now listen. On the investors' side, these are a big bunch of boys and girls on Wall Street who made decisions about what they should invest in. We know from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network that mortgage fraud has been rampant: 1,400 percent increase over the last 6 years; 42 percent increase last year alone, with the majority of the fraud being borrowers who lied about their income, about their assets, about their occupancy; and yet we have a bill to help them out. Let's hear from some of the people who are being called upon to do the bailout. I often ask people who reside in the Fifth Congressional District of Texas that I have the honor of representing what they think about legislation coming to the House floor. And I hear from people like the Sadler family in Mesquite, Texas, and they write: ``Congressman, 3 years ago my husband and I faced the loss of our home due to a decrease in the sales income. We cut our expenses as much as possible, but it was simply no longer affordable. We made the decision to put the home on the market before we faced foreclosure. ``I am adamantly opposed to my tax dollars going toward bailing anyone out of a mortgage crisis. If we didn't have to give up so much of our income to the government for taxes, we could have continued to afford our home.'' And what is the answer of the Democrat majority? Well, to the Sadler family in Mesquite, we're going to increase your taxes an extra $3,000 a year. Mr. Speaker, I heard from Sergeant First Class Kenneth Adams of Frankston, Texas. He writes: ``Congressman, the mortgage crisis Congress is trying to fix is an insult. My house went unpainted until I could return from serving in Iraq. I'm a Sergeant First Class in the United States Army with over 20 years active and reserve service. Some day I would like to use my VA house-buying benefits, but what a fool I was to earn those type of benefits when all I had to do was be irresponsible, overspend, and have the government bail me out.'' That's the answer that the Democrat majority brings to the floor, and it is an insult to 98 percent of Americans who did it right. Mr. Speaker, we should reject this legislation.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on each side.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I wish to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. I yield myself 30 seconds. As the distinguished majority leader said, this is about people hurting. He should know. Since his Democrat majority came into office almost 18 months ago, we know that we have a $3,000 per family tax increase that has been approved, gasoline at almost $4 a gallon, milk over $4 a gallon. Yes. This is about people hurting, particularly the 98 percent that rent, that have paid off their mortgages and whose mortgages are current. And if this bill is only going to cost the taxpayers $2.7 billion, why do we see $300 billion written in the bill? With that, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona, Jeff Flake.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HENSARLING. Again, if this is such a great priority for the States and they're crying out for these loans and grants, why does the State of Massachusetts continue to spend $760,245 for pools and spray pools under the control of the Department of Conservation and Recreation? Michigan, $9.4 million to enhance public boating access and dock facilities. I have no doubt, Madam Chairman, that this is important. But again, if we have a housing crisis, maybe the good people of Michigan could cut back a little on their boating access facilities. State of Ohio. They apparently have a wonderful ``Discover Ohio'' tourism and marketing campaign, $8.2 million. Maybe they could use some of that money to assist the people in their State. How about some of the municipalities? According to the Daily News, Los Angeles spends a half a million dollars, $550,000 to be exact, for calligraphers to decorate proclamations and honors. I'm sure that those proclamations are very handsome, but again, if we're having a housing crisis, maybe people in Los Angeles can cut back on the calligraphy to assist the people in need. And yet the Democrat majority--and the gentlelady from California who perhaps is familiar with the calligraphy--has decided instead to take the money away from the Federal Treasury, help raise taxes on hardworking American families while they're trying to fill up their cars to take their children to school, to try to go to work, so that ultimately we're subsidizing Ohio tourism, L.A. calligraphy, water boating access in Michigan, and the list goes on and on. Surely we can find something that is more fiscally responsible and more creative than yet another grant and loan program to States and localities that ultimately bail out investors and Wall Street. This is bad legislation. It should be defeated.

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HENSARLING. I yield myself the balance of my time. Well, first, I would say to my friend from Georgia and other friends on that side of the aisle, if loans are so bad, why are they in the bill in the first place? Second of all, this bill does nothing to stop foreclosures, not a thing. Quite the opposite. Instead, it will increase foreclosures. What you have is an incentive for these investors to no longer do a workout with the struggling family, but instead, I can get bailed out. I can get bailed out by the Federal taxpayer. This is a bill that will help banks, Wall Street and States and does nothing for foreclosed families. It certainly does nothing for the taxpayer, and if we have a liquidity problem, which we do, let's cut the capital gains tax rate and you will see capital come into this market. I urge adoption.

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I will yield myself as much time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, I thank the ranking member for his comments and again bringing up what is a very important issue here. And that is fundamentally what we have before us is a Wall Street bailout bill. Now we all know there are some very significant challenges in our housing markets. But the answer is not to be bailing out lenders. They may be good lenders who made bad bets, and maybe they are the predatory lenders that we hear so much about. This bill doesn't make any particular distinction. The people who can stay in their homes, if they just get a little help, we need disclosure. We need to enforce the law against fraud. There has been a lot of mortgage fraud on the borrowers' side, on the lenders' side. Most importantly now, Madam Chairman, we need to prevent the single largest tax increase in American history passed by the Democrat majority in their budget which means that people who are struggling to pay their mortgages are going to have to pay more taxes. The rising fuel cost, that's happened under the watch of the Democrat majority; the rising cost of food happened under the watch of the Democrat majority. They've been in charge of the economic policy of America for almost a year and a half now. It is the shrinking paycheck of the hardworking American homeowner and taxpayer that's at the crux of this problem. And so what this underlying bill does is take $15 billion of money away from the school teacher in Mesquite, Texas, struggling to pay his mortgage; the guy who works at the Pepsi bottling plant in Mesquite; the rancher out in Athens, Texas; takes money away from them to bail out all of these bad investors who made these bad bets. So you can't say that you were concerned about Bear Stearns and then all of a sudden turn right around and have this humongous Wall Street bailout bill. My amendment is simple. Presently, you have a $15 billion bill, half of which are loans and half of which are grants. The purpose of the amendment is to turn this into strictly a loan program. Now, I don't believe in the purpose of the underlying bill. But, if you're going to bail out Wall Street and use taxpayer money, let's at least, at least try to make it a loan so that there is at least some chance, some chance that the taxpayer who's facing a $3,000-a-year increase in their taxes for a family of four over the next 3 years under the majority budget, that maybe, maybe they have some small chance of recouping some of that money from all of these cities and localities. And by the way, again, the last I looked, almost every single State and municipality in America is running a surplus. Yet the Federal Government isn't, and so what does the underlying bill do? Hands out more grant money, more grant money on top of the $57 trillion of unfunded obligations that every man, woman and child in America already owes. Well, let's add some more grant money. Well, if it's that important to States and municipalities, maybe they would want to fund it or maybe they could take the loan money and eventually pay it back so maybe the Democrat majority wouldn't have to raise taxes on the Federal taxpayers quite as much. So, Madam Chairman, it's a very commonsense amendment. If you're going to do it, at least do loans and don't do grants. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Thank you, Madam Chairman. First, I would like to yield 30 seconds to the ranking member, the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and I certainly rise in opposition to this bill. I have no doubt that it is certainly good-hearted but it is certainly wrongheaded. There is a great challenge in our housing markets today, but I come here with some interest and amusement to see how many of my friends on the Democratic side of the aisle bemoaned the Bear Stearns bailout by the Federal Reserve, only to come here and offer a bill that, ultimately, using the States and localities as a conduit, is going to bail out Wall Street. It's going to bail out the investors, the people who own these properties in the first place, the people who made bad debts. I wish somebody would introduce a bill to bail me out of my bad debts. Perhaps next time I invest in real estate or the stock market or the commodities, somebody will come here and say, if I failed, we will get the taxpayer to come in and bail me out. Second of all, it misses the point of what the true challenge is. The true challenge in our housing markets is a shrinking paycheck, and I know as much as our friends on the other side of the aisle wish to come and blame all the economic woes of our Nation on us, the truth is elections have consequences. They've been in charge of the economic policy of this Nation for almost 18 months now. And what have they done in 18 months? Number one, they passed a budget that has the largest single tax increase in American history, largest single tax increase in American history. After 3 years fully phased in, it's going to be a $3,000 average burden on the American family. That shrinking paycheck causes people not to be able to pay their mortgage bills. We know what's happened to gasoline prices, almost $4 a gallon. Shrinking paycheck. Now supposedly they were going to bring the price of gas down when they were elected. The American people know differently, and it's not just gasoline that's $4 a gallon. Milk. I've got a 6-year-old and a 4-year-old back home in Dallas, Texas. They drink a lot of milk. Milk's expensive. The cereal they like, it's expensive, all happening under their watch. A shrinking paycheck. How are people supposed to afford their mortgage when they're having to pay historic high gasoline prices, historic high food prices and pay an extra $3,000 in taxes? Madam Chairman, that's the real challenge that America's families are facing now. And here's another problem with this particular piece of legislation that I find. It ignores the greater crisis in America, and that is the spending crisis, the one that is ignored on a daily basis here. Already we notice that when the new Member from Louisiana was sworn in today, we all saw that he had his baby in his arms, and, I don't know, it might have been a 1-year-old or 2-year-old child, but that child already has inherited a debt of almost $200,000 because Congress after Congress keeps on spending money and sends the burden to future generations. So, you know, what is it? It's $7.5 billion for grants here and $7.5 billion for loans there. Well, Madam Chairman, sooner or later we're talking about real money. We're on the verge of being the first generation in America's history to leave the next generation with a lower standard of living. And it's not just me that's saying it, it's the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget, the General Accountability Office. And yet again, the Democrat majority ignores that true crisis. I also find it quite interesting that while the Federal Government continues to be awash in the sea of red ink in passing on unfunded obligations to future generations, that almost every State and municipality in the Nation is running a surplus.

Mr. HENSARLING. So we're taking money away from a treasury that has none to supplement treasuries that do have some. We have a great challenge in our Nation. And clearly predatory lending took place, I might add, so did predatory borrowing. And so we need to help people, but the way to help them when people are struggling to pay their mortgages is not to raise their taxes and force them to pay the mortgages of their neighbor, particularly a number of neighbors and Wall Street investors who speculated, who might have engaged in fraud. But Madam Chairman, back to the States and localities. For example, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts spends $11 million a year on their Office of Tourism. If we're having a great housing crisis, maybe they could cut back a little on the tourism budget and help the people in need for housing.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I've heard some very eloquent comments from my friends on the other side of the aisle about the pain the American people are feeling at this time. They speak with some credibility. They helped cause it. After 18 months of being in control of the economic policies of our Nation, what do we have? We have gasoline approaching $4 a gallon, milk already over $4 a gallon, people struggling, struggling to put groceries on the table, and seemingly our friends on the other side of the aisle said that is unrelated to people trying to pay their mortgages and keep their home. The biggest enemy that we have to the American Dream of homeownership is a shrinking paycheck. What has been done by the Democrat majority to shrink the paycheck? Well, number one, they passed a budget that has the single largest tax increase in American history. Over a 3-year period, we will see an extra $3,000 tax burden put on a family of four while they're struggling to pay their mortgage payments. We were told that somehow under their watch gasoline prices would come down. Instead, they have gone up. We see food prices absolutely unaffordable, and yet they see no connection to the home mortgage challenge that we have today. Many of them have decried Wall Street bailouts, but what do they do? They bring a bailout bill to the floor, up to $300 billion of taxpayer exposure, and all a lender has to do is say, you know what, as long as he agrees to a 15 percent haircut, we will take his risk and put it on the taxpayers. When you're struggling to pay your own mortgage, you shouldn't have to bail out the speculators, those who engaged in mortgage fraud. You shouldn't have to bail out somebody else. There's a better way to do it, and it is not this humongous bailout bill.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, May 14th marks the 60th anniversary of the modern State of Israel. For six decades, America has stood by Israel's side as her partner in peace and defended her as a beacon of democracy in a region dominated by war, authoritarian regimes, and religious conflict. In 1948, the United States became the first country to welcome Israel into the community of nations, and we have stood with and supported her as she has defended herself from those who seek her destruction each and every day. Israel has been our staunchest ally in the Middle East, as well as a full partner in the global war against radical jihadists--individuals who attack our Nation, our children, our values, and the very existence of Western civilization. The Old Testament teaches us the foundation of Israel's storied past. For three thousand years, the Jewish people have created a cultural, religious, and national identity, a connection rooted in their unbroken ties to the Holy Land. When the modern State of Israel was created 60 years ago, that Jewish heritage was renewed. Madam Speaker, Israel has a legal, moral, and historical right to exist in peace with secure and defensible borders. Make no mistake, Israel's challenges are vast. Each day Israelis face the verbal and physical threat of annihilation looming on the horizon. From Tehran. Damascus, and Hebron come unrelenting calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. Meantime, rockets from Gaza rain down on the homes and schools of Sderot. Ashkelon, and other Israeli cities, all the while the United Nations sits idle and echoes anti- Israel, anti-Semitic proclamations. Israel remains a nation under siege. Therefore, Madam Speaker, today I come to this floor, our own altar of democracy, to celebrate a nation that has turned adversity into triumph and took a dispersed population and made them whole. Like America, Israel is a country of immigrants and has opened its doors to every Jewish immigrant to become a citizen. This story has now united people from over 70 countries and has turned Israel into a society of multi-ethnic communities living side by side with one another. As the world's oldest democracy, today we celebrate the success of a democratic relative. Israel exists in a part of the world that knows little democracy, yet Israel has displayed the hope and dignity that accompanies rule by the people and personal freedom. Although blessed with few natural resources, this young nation has seen the fruits of its labor pay off through an incredible amount of economic prosperity and cultural creativity. Yet as Israel works for peace with security, we must not forget that peace can never be achieved by asking Israel to put at risk its sovereignty and the safety of its people. We must constantly reaffirm our own ties to this democratic society in a part of the world so desperately in need of democracy. This is vitally important to our own security. And we must all realize this. Thus, I will continue to support Israel and pray she one day will live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force. I am honored to come to the floor today to celebrate the 60th anniversary of our ally, the nation of Israel.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, when we're talking about our ally, Colombia, Hugo Chavez wants this trade agreement to never see the light of day, and our Democrat colleagues agree.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I find it fascinating that the Democrat majority this week can find time to rename post offices, but somehow cannot find the time to vote on a trade agreement to help create more American jobs. We're talking about a trade agreement to where over 90 percent of Colombian goods come into our country duty-free, yet only 3 percent of our goods go into their country duty-free. We're trying to level the playing field here, Mr. Speaker. We're trying to create more American jobs. What could be more fair? Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to sit down with the Fed Chairman this week. And as we talk about tough economic times, we ought to learn the lessons of history. And one of the lessons of history is that starting a trade war can bring about a recession, and that's what we see the Democrats doing. People are struggling to make their paychecks stretch. Why don't we create more jobs? Why don't we level this playing field?

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, today I rise to recognize Boy Scouts of America Troop 343 and their sponsor, First United Methodist Church of Athens, as they celebrate their 80th anniversary. Founded in 1928, Boy Scout Troop 3 began in Athens, Texas and, later became Troop 343. Over the past 12 months alone, Troop 343 has provided nearly 2,000 hours of community service on projects such as: collecting food for the Athens food pantry, picking up trash, and performing several flag retirement services and flag ceremonies. In addition, the Troop has partnered in service projects with the Henderson County Historical Society, Henderson County Center for the Performing Arts, and First United Methodist Church of Athens. This Troop has not only remained devoted to preserving the ideals of Boy Scouts of America, they have done so with excellence. Seventy-four members from this Troop have achieved the rank of Eagle, Scouting's highest honor. I also want to recognize Tommy Faulk, volunteer and former Boy Scout, for his integral role in providing a new facility for the Scouts of Troop 343. In addition to teaching outdoor skills, Scouting also includes leadership training. Today's Boy Scouts are the leaders of tomorrow. Receiving my Eagle was one of the proudest moments of my life. The values, ethics, and morality boys learn through Scouting are critical not only for themselves, but to this nation as well. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Fifth District of Texas, I am honored to recognize Troop 343 for their longstanding devotion to service, leadership, and citizenship.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, today I rise to recognize two outstanding citizens of Frankston, Texas, Melvin Scott and Minnie Lou Scott. On November 8, 2007 the Scotts celebrated their 80th wedding anniversary, an accomplishment that very few achieve. The Scotts' long- lasting marriage is one that exemplifies dedication and healthy values. In fact, Frankston citizens often ask the Scotts' advice on how they too can have a successful, long lasting marriage. On February 21, 2008 Melvin celebrated his 101st birthday. Minnie Lou is 99-years-old. They have one son, three grandchildren and four great grandchildren. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Fifth District of Texas, I am honored to recognize Melvin and Minnie Lou Scott for their longstanding dedication to each other and their family.