Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Chair, I listened very carefully to the distinguished chairman of the House Budget Committee. But unfortunately, I think he may need a history lesson on who has controlled this institution for the last 2 years. And also, as I read the Constitution, Madam Chair, I would say to my friend from South Carolina, if I were allowed to speak to him, it says that it is Congress, Congress is in charge of spending decisions, Congress has the ability to spend money, create debts and create deficits. And I agree. President Obama inherited a huge deficit. He inherited it from Democrats in the United States Congress. So he took a $1.3 trillion debt, it was a $160 billion deficit rather, and now he and the Democrats in Congress are adding to it a sea of red ink for as far as the eye could see. Never in the history of this country have we seen so much debt. Their budget, Madam Chair, will simply bankrupt this country. And they seem to be oblivious to the facts. Again, never, never have so few voted so fast to indebt so many. And it is just the start of their economic calamity that they are trying to impose upon the Nation. Now we hear all of this lofty talk about, well, we need this wonderful budget and all of this spending to get us out of the recession. Then why, why is it that the President's own OMB says that we are out of this recession in the fourth quarter of 2009? Then why impose this unconscionable burden of debt on our children? Madam Chair, there was a time in America's history when the American ethic was, you work hard today so your children can live better tomorrow. Well, this Democratic economic program just turns that around and says, let government live better today so our children can work harder tomorrow. It is an outrage. It is an outrage. A national energy tax. Tax on small businesses. Taxes on the capital of capitalism. As one of my colleagues said, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mack), our budget is about we the people. Their budget is about I the government. If you think you can borrow your way, spend your way, tax your way into prosperity, Madam Chair, then that is the budget for you. But if you think America is about rolling up your sleeves, working hard, risking capital and dreaming bold dreams so that people can go to work and find their own future, then there is an alternative, Madam Chair. It is the Republican budget that will be offered tomorrow. And it will give a great Nation a great future.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The outrage is continued. What we have today here is nothing short of a legislative coverup. That's what we're looking at here, Mr. Speaker. And when you look at these two different proposals that have come to the floor, one of which would trample on the Constitution in order to perpetrate this legislative coverup. And now we have the spectacle of Senator Dodd pointing the finger at Secretary Geithner, and Secretary Geithner pointing the finger at Senator Dodd. But what we do know is that our friends on the other side of the aisle, the Democrats, could have prevented this. But this language got in the bill, and all of a sudden it has no parents. Nobody will claim where this came from, this magical language that somehow allows these outrageous AIG bonuses to be paid. Here's a news flash: Why don't we tell them, ``No more Federal money, AIG, until these bonuses are repaid?'' Don't come up with this political cover-your-backside language, trying to excuse all the people who are responsible for this in the first place. Don't trample on our Constitution in order to do this legislative coverup. What happened to supposedly the most open and honest Congress in the history of America? This is transparency? This is honesty? And instead, we have cover up. Vote it down.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, to state the obvious, everybody in this economy is hurting. I've got personal friends of mine who never thought they would lose their jobs who have lost their jobs. But when we look at this piece of legislation, you have to ask the question who are you helping, why are you helping, and whom are you hurting to help the other people? We need to remember, Mr. Chairman, that, first, 94 percent of all America still is either renting their home, they own it outright, or they're current on their mortgage. Now, I want to make sure that we help those who through no fault of their own are finding themselves in arrears. I want to help the person who lost their job or through some debilitating disease can't keep up with their mortgage. But, Mr. Chairman, mortgage fraud has ran rampant for the last 2 years. There were people out there who speculated in real estate. There were people who turned their homes into personal ATM machines. There are people who could have made sacrifices and now they expect their neighbor to make the sacrifice. Mr. Chairman, it's just patently unfair when you're struggling to pay your mortgage to be forced to pay your neighbor's as well. I heard from one of my constituents about this very subject. I heard from Theresa Steele in Mesquite, Texas, and she wrote me: ``Congressman, I had to put off purchasing a home because of medical expenses that my family had to deal with. While paying these medical expenses, I was able to pay rent on a house. But it's really frustrating. You cannot get a break because our taxes keep going up along with the cost of groceries and gas, et cetera, and it seems no matter what you do, you cannot get ahead when others are out there throwing caution to the wind and seem able to have my tax dollars bail them out. It doesn't seem right to me.'' Well, Mr. Chairman, if Theresa Steele was here, I would say it doesn't seem right to me either. To increase her taxes to pay for somebody else's mistake is patently unfair, will not help our economy. You cannot tax and borrow your way back into prosperity.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, as our countrymen are hurting, as our unemployment news grows grim, what is the answer of the Democrat majority? They have brought us the largest single 1-year increase in the Federal deficit; they have brought us the largest deficit ever, $1.2 trillion, 8.3 percent of our economy; they've brought us the largest government debt ever, a debt that will be passed on to our children and grandchildren. And today they bring the largest regular appropriations process in history to the floor totaling at $1 trillion. They have achieved, Mr. Speaker, a trifecta of trillions: a trillion dollars to stimulate government, a trillion dollars of Federal deficit, a trillion dollars for a regular appropriations bill. This bill, Mr. Speaker, is going to grow the government 8.3 percent. Washington can grow 8.3 percent, the Federal budget can grow 8.3 percent. But the family budget, which has to pay for the Federal budget, only grew at 1.3 percent last year. So somehow Washington is entitled to almost a six-fold increase in their budget but working families are not? You know, I don't see it. I don't see it, Mr. Speaker. Now, something I do see is an old quote from Yogi Berra: ``It's deja vu all over again.'' So now I'm seeing $3.13 billion for the 2010 census on top of the billion dollars that was given to the census in the so-called stimulus bill; $1.45 billion for Amtrak on top of the $1.3 billion Amtrak received in the stimulus bill. And the list goes on and on. Again, Mr. Speaker, this is more legislation designed to stimulate the government and not to stimulate the economy. Let me give you a quote from one of our Secretaries of Treasury. He said, ``We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work. We have never made good on our promises. After 8 years of this administration, we have just as much in unemployment as when we started, an enormous debt to boot.'' The Secretary of Treasury was Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Secretary of Treasury. Those words were spoken in 1939. And now we see the example of Japan. Mr. Speaker, you cannot spend and borrow your way into economic prosperity. They had nothing to show for what they did in Japan. Ten stimulus bills, but no jobs, no economic growth, and the largest per capita debt in the world. We should reject following the Japanese way.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding once again. And I was happy to see I could save the gentleman from Massachusetts the trouble of looking into his earmark books, as he will find none for me. I noticed that the gentleman from Massachusetts didn't deny any of the factual assertions. Since Democrats took control of the Congress, we have the single largest 1-year increase in the deficit. He didn't deny it. Go to CBO. You'll find the fact. We now have the largest deficit ever since Democrats took control of this Chamber. Go to CBO, you'll find out it's a fact. We have the largest government debt ever under Democrat control of this House. He did not deny the fact. I would also point out--since the gentleman has been in this body for quite some time--that it is Congress, it is Congress that passes budgets, not the White House, as much as he would like to blame all of this on the White House. It is Congress. And every year I've been here, Mr. Speaker, whenever the Republicans have presented a budget--and I haven't been ecstatic about each and every one--my friends on the other side of the aisle present a budget with even more spending that ultimately leads to higher taxes on struggling families in America. That is the fact.

Mr. HENSARLING. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, people want to know how did we get into this painful economy. Too many of our fellow citizens borrowed too much. They spent too much, and they couldn't pay it back. And now the mistakes of individuals, the Democrats want to force upon us collectively. Mr. Speaker, you cannot borrow and spend your way into prosperity. Even the Democrats' own Congressional Budget Office says H.R. 1 is the single greatest spending bill in the history of America, will leave us the greatest debt in the history of America, and ultimately, will hurt our economy, leaving a legacy of debt, crushing debt for future generations. The Republicans want to stimulate the economy by helping small business. The Democrats want to stimulate big government. The Democrats want to spend millions on urban canals. The Republicans want to spend millions on small businesses like Williams Paint and Body, to preserve and grow 21 jobs. Democrats want to spend $300 million to buy government bureaucrats new cars. Republicans want to spend money on Terry Manufacturing, to preserve and secure 20 new jobs. Big government or small business? Choose small business.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, it is with profound admiration and respect that I commemorate the 200th anniversary of President Abraham Lincoln's birth. From humble beginnings in a one room log cabin in the backwoods of Kentucky, Lincoln, a self-taught lawyer, went on to win a narrow victory in 1860 to become our 16th president. Not long after he took office, our country was plunged into a war between the states that threatened to destroy everything our Founding Fathers had fought so hard to establish. As the war raged, Lincoln led the Union through the maelstrom to save our Republic. At the same time, he paved the way to freedom for millions who had never known it. Sadly, an assassin's bullet stole Lincoln from his people just days after the Civil War ended. Madam Speaker, as we commemorate his 200th birthday, I reflect upon the life of President Lincoln and the sacrifices he made to protect the principles of freedom we cherish so deeply. A man of great wisdom and courage who guided our country through some of its darkest hours, President Lincoln embodies the true meaning of what it is to be an American. While, in the words of Secretary of War Edwin M. Staunton, Lincoln ``belongs to the ages,'' he lives in the hearts of freedom loving people in the United States and around the world.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Well, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank my friend for his leadership in helping educate the American people, in this case they no longer need it, on the perils involved in this so- called ``stimulus'' bill. And Mr. Speaker, I guess it is a stimulus bill. It is a bill to stimulate Big Government. Unfortunately, it is not a bill to stimulate our economy. When I come to the House floor, I understand that elections have consequences. And I usually don't complain about the process. But I must note that when Speaker Pelosi took over the speakership of the House of Representatives, she said publicly that she wanted a new day to dawn, that we would have more openness, more transparency, that there would be input from the minority. It is not true. Not one meeting, not one meeting with the Republican leadership with respect to this bill. There are no amendments allowed on the floor. She told us that it was immoral the debt that we were placing on future generations and that with Democrats in control of the House of Representatives and of this government, that they would end deficit spending. And now, according to the Congressional Budget Office, we're looking at the largest single increase in the deficit that we've seen in our history. And it wasn't, what, 48 hours ago that on this very floor we voted as a House to ensure that the American people had at least 48 hours to view what the press says will be a 1,400-page bill, the single most expensive piece of legislation in the history of America. And Mr. Speaker, as I look at the clock, it is a little after 7 o'clock East Coast time, and we're due to vote on this thing tomorrow. I haven't seen the bill. I don't know if my colleagues have seen the bill. I doubt seriously the American people have seen the bill. I stand corrected. Apparently the gentleman from Texas has one hot off the press.

Mr. HENSARLING. Well, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And indeed, President Obama, contrary to Speaker Pelosi, did reach out a hand to Republicans. He met with all the Republicans in the House of Representatives, something I don't think Speaker Pelosi has ever done. He met with our leadership twice in trying to craft legislation. I give him the utmost credit for that. I don't know our President well. I've met him a few times, but he struck me as a very sincere and honest man. And we disagree on many aspects of the stimulus bill. But the exchange I had with him, I know that he is also a father of two small children. And it's so easy in Washington to spend other people's money and hand the bill to the next generation. Frankly, it happens here every single day of the week. And I just asked the President and implored the President, please, Mr. President, please, Mr. President, before you sign this piece of legislation, in whatever final form it may be, think first of your children, my children and the Nation's children and how will we ever pay for this. Now, again, he disagreed with me on certain issues, but I believe he was sincere and passionate in his concern about this debt. And I believe he made a commitment to us, and I hope he'll have ample opportunities in his term as President to see it good, that, regardless of what the cost is of this legislation, that he knows that other legislation will be necessary. And I believe--I don't want to quote the President. People will have to, reporters can talk to him about what he said. But what I thought I heard him say is that if all we passed is this stimulus bill, we would be doing a disservice to future generations. So I'll take him at his word. I don't believe this is the right legislation. I feel he has concern, but I'm always, always curious how Speaker Pelosi and some of my other friends on the other side of the aisle think that we will ever, ever, ever, be able to pay off this debt. And I certainly want to give the President plenty of opportunities in the future to do something about that. And again, I thank the gentleman for his leadership. I thank him for yielding.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, people are hurting in this economy. Personal friends of mine, hardworking, smart individuals and well educated individuals are laid off from their jobs. People are having to dig deep into their savings. People are running out of their savings. And so the Republicans have come up with not just a theory, but a piece of legislation that is backed up by history that can help preserve jobs, help create jobs, help expand that take-home pay for American families, help the unemployed, and get to the root cause, the root cause of this economic calamity, and that is to help remove some of this excess real estate from the market. Every time we have faced a recession, you can go to earlier this decade, you can go back to 1981 and 1982. You can go back to the Kennedy administration, every time you lower marginal rates for hardworking American people, you expand their paychecks. And that is how you expand the economy. But, Mr. Speaker, when you look at this bill, less than 18 percent of this bill has anything to do with tax relief. And at least in the last version we were able to see, since the Democrats have not had the courtesy to show us what we're going to vote on tomorrow, less than 3 percent of that was geared towards small businesses. The job engine in America is small business. I looked at this bill, and there is next to nothing, next to nothing for the small businesses that I represent in the Fifth Congressional District of Texas. I looked at the House version that was voted on earlier. I can tell you, there is nothing in it for First Choice Tax Service in Seagoville, Texas. I looked very hard. I can find nothing for Gator Auto Transport in Canton. I really looked down deep, and there is nothing here for Tallyho Plastics in Jacksonville, Texas. Nothing to preserve jobs and create jobs in small business. Instead, what we have is a 40-year wish list of the left to grow Big Government. And so that is why we see debt service and growing Big Government is about 80 percent of this legislation. That is why we give $200 million for computer centers at community colleges and $10 million for urban canals. I'm not completely certain what an urban canal is, but I'm fairly certain that the taxpayers, the struggling families, the struggling small businesses of the Fifth District of Texas don't want to pay for it. There is $255 million for a polar icebreaker for the Coast Guard. Now, Mr. Speaker maybe the Coast Guard does need a new polar icebreaker. But somebody needs to explain to me and my constituents how that is going to stimulate the economy and how that is going to make their paycheck safer. I don't see it. There is $75 million for the Smithsonian Institution. I love the Smithsonian. But Mr. Speaker, this doesn't stimulate the economy. There is $20 million to remove fish passage barriers. Maybe the fish enjoy it. But again, I see nothing in it for the small businesses in America. And I think it is such a pivotal point in our Nation's history. What a poor charade, a poor charade on the American people. In a spate of candor, the former chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, now Chief of Staff to the President, said to his former colleagues, our friends on the other side of the aisle, the Democrats, ``never let a serious crisis go to waste.'' And Mr. Speaker, I assure you, they haven't. And they have loaded it up with every big government idea known to mankind. And I see we have other colleagues here, and I don't want to dominate all the time. But I think it's also important, Mr. Speaker, that we know that when you look at this so-called stimulus bill, this bill to stimulate big government, it's been tried before. Anybody who has studied economic history knows about Japan's lost decade. In fact, I have a recent story from the New York Times dated February 6, not exactly a bastion of conservative thought, I might add, Mr. Speaker. It's entitled ``Japan's Big-Works Stimulus is a Lesson.'' And it talks about the time when Japan faced a similar economic challenge. And it says, ``During those 2 decades, Japan accumulated the largest public debt in the developed world, totaling 180 percent of its economy, while failing to generate a convincing recovery.'' I read further in the article. ``This has led many to conclude that spending did little more than sink Japan deeply into debt, leaving an enormous tax burden for future generations.'' I've studied the model. The Democrat stimulus bill is based on that model. You know what happened? Not only did Japan have the highest per capita debt of any industrialized nation in the world, they didn't create any new jobs in the entire decade of the nineties. Their per capita income went from second in the world to tenth in the world, and they left a legacy of debt for generations to come. And that's why, Mr. Speaker, I'm so sad to come to this House floor, knowing that this body, the People's House, is on the precipice of doing exactly the same thing. And so I come down to this House floor to raise my voice. I'm the father of two small children, a 5-year-old and a 6-year-old. I don't want to leave them a legacy of debt that this bill will leave them, the largest single debt in American history. How are they ever, ever going to work that off? There's an alternative. Help small businesses. Increase the family paycheck. Help the unemployed. Get the excess housing off the market. It's the Republican alternative. It is the alternative that creates twice as many jobs at half the cost, and does not leave an unconscionable, unconscionable and immoral debt burden on our children and grandchildren. And so I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him for his leadership. And I yield back.

Mr. HENSARLING. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I listened carefully to the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. We agree there are people who are suffering. But, Mr. Chairman, the people who are going to suffer the most are children and grandchildren who are about to inherit $1.2 trillion of additional debt burden for a piece of legislation that has not received one, not one congressional hearing and will have little to no economic stimulus. Now, Mr. Chairman, something else I agree on with my friends on the other side of the aisle, this Nation needs a stimulus bill, but we need an economic stimulus bill, not a big government stimulus bill. That's why, Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of the Republican alternative that will help preserve jobs, that will help grow job opportunities in small businesses all across America. I am proud to support an alternative that will expand the paycheck of working Americans so that they can pay for their mortgages, so that they can send their kids to college, so that they can pay their health care premiums. I am proud to support an alternative that helps the unemployed at this time of need, that will help reduce the housing glut from the market and, perhaps, even more importantly, Mr. Chairman, doesn't send the bill to our children and our grandchildren. What our Democrat colleagues send us is a bill that, even if you were a Keynesian, doesn't help stimulate economic growth. Only 3 or 4 percent of this is about traditional infrastructure. Instead, we have $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $1 billion for Amtrak, an extra $1 billion to follow up the Census. Over half of this bill is on traditional big government. We know what Rahm Emanuel, the former chairman of the DNC has said: never waste a crisis. They are not wasting it. They are building big government.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, it is a sad day for the United States Congress. People are hurting throughout this entire economy. And instead of bringing a bill that would stimulate our economy, what we see before us is a bill that will simply stimulate big government. You know, most Americans, Mr. Chairman, believe that the reason that we are in the problem economy that we have is because as a Nation we borrowed and spent too much. And, instead, we have a bill theoretically to solve our problem that borrows and spends too much. You cannot borrow and spend your way into prosperity. Now, Mr. Chairman, if we were all Keynesians, and I assure you I am not, but if we were, all government spending is not created equal. The Keynesians would tell you. You look at this bill, 4 percent of this is spent on what most economists would call infrastructure, our roads and bridges. We need tax relief for small businesses. We need tax relief for American families. And we need to do it in a way that doesn't send the bill to future generations. The tax relief for small businesses is as miniscule, less than 2 percent. Instead, what we have is over half of this bill is to inflate big government. We have $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $726 million for an after-school snack program, office furniture for the Public Health Service, $1 billion for the Census. Mr. Chairman, the list goes on and on and on. And what we have is a bill that when you add the debt service is $1.2 trillion.

Mr. HENSARLING. Well, I appreciate the offer of the chairman. But I have plenty of opportunities to speak with him.

Mr. HENSARLING. The gentleman from Virginia was the one who spoke. So I'm happy to yield time to him. I see the gentleman is not interested in answering the question.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman. I listened to the gentleman from Virginia carefully, and I'm curious. I would be happy to yield time to him. When he talks about provisions that make economic sense, could he explain how $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts makes economic sense for his congressional district? I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. I must admit, Mr. Speaker, I find it quite ironic that many of my friends on the other side of the aisle who for weeks, if not months, have come to condemn the TARP program, to tell us all of its woes and shortcomings only to come now and say I'm going to vote for the next $350 billion. And it's clear to me, listening to the debate, that my friend, the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee, must be number one on the list of Members of Congress who will miss President George W. Bush. Everything that has happened in our land apparently is the responsibility of the former President, from the TARP program to bad breath and everything in between. But if every press account in the Western World is correct, it would appear that the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee was largely responsible for writing the legislation. Now, again, I know him to be an honorable man, I know him to be a principled man, but this is legislation that I believe was written in haste. Maybe the circumstances caused it to be written in haste. But since then we have something different, Mr. Chairman. We have the Federal Reserve now has committed almost--between the Federal Reserve, the FDIC and the Treasury and FHA under the HOPE for Homeowners program, we are now looking at almost $8 trillion of potential taxpayer liability. I'm curious, number one, what is it that's going to be achieved with this extra $350 billion where there is no plan--no plan has been presented by the administration. I mean, you know, he just took the oath of office, we were all there; there is no plan that has been presented. And what is it on an emergency situation that the Federal Reserve cannot do with their various and sundry auction facilities that are already set up? And if this money is needed on a very urgent basis, what is it that prevents this body from coming and acting upon a specific request of the administration? And the answer is: Nothing. Well, Mr. Speaker, what we have to look at is, this is an extra $350 billion that's going to be added on top of the single largest federal deficit that we've ever seen. Since my friends on the other side of the aisle have taken control of this House, we have seen the Federal deficit go from less than $200 billion to something 800 percent higher, I mean, $1.2 trillion. And sooner or later, Mr. Speaker, somebody has to pay for that. We need an economic growth plan that will preserve jobs and grow jobs. We need an economic growth plan that will expand family's paychecks so they can pay their mortgage payments--our version of foreclosure mitigation. And we need a plan that doesn't send unconscionable, immoral debt to our children and grandchildren. Granting an arbitrary number of $350 billion to an incoming administration without a plan does not meet that test.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. HENSARLING. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, again, I want to compliment the gentleman from New York for his amendment. I think it certainly improves the underlying bill. My main concerns remain with the underlying bill; and I am still fearful that this institution is about to, essentially, commit the same error that many feel was committed a few months ago. I myself did not vote for the underlying TARP legislation; I voted against it twice. I supported an alternative plan. Now, these continue to be very serious challenging, serious economic times that need thoughtful plans. But we are essentially saying to the incoming administration: Here is a $350 billion bank account. Well, I say, where is the plan? And Congress isn't going away. Congress can come, and when the need is presented and the plan is presented, can vote for this money. There is the Federal Reserve. We are already up to $7 trillion to $8 trillion of taxpayer liability exposure that includes their various lending facilities. It is not like, if Congress goes to bed at night, that no one is there to aid in an emergency situation.

Mr. HENSARLING. I would be happy to yield to the chairman.

Mr. HENSARLING. Reclaiming my time, I understand that, to the distinguished chairman; but I also understand, as I believe you said, to paraphrase, this sends an important signal. I don't want to send the signal that the vote on the underlying legislation would provide that, here is $350 billion, without a plan. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, as a Member of Congress it is a high honor to cast my vote in the people's House. In my career, I have exercised that privilege over 4,200 times. While my record is not perfect, I am proud that last year I participated in 99 percent of all votes. That is all the more reason why I am filled with regret that I unintentionally missed my opportunity to cast a vote last Friday on Rollcall No. 10, the resolution recognizing Israel's right to defend herself against attacks from Gaza. As a longtime supporter of Israel and her right to exist, I want to inform the House that were I present for the vote, I would have voted in favor of this important resolution. Madam Speaker, I offer my strong support of Israel and H. Res. 34. Since the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza in 2005, Hamas has continually launched thousands of rockets into southern Israel, killing innocent civilians, destroying vital infrastructure and private property, and holding hostage virtually all southern Israel's residents. Though the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire of June 2008 reduced the number of rocket attacks from Gaza, the attacks never fully ended. Instead, Hamas and its foreign allies used this opportunity to smuggle more weapons into the region. Once the ceasefire expired on December 19, 2008, Hamas resumed its daily attacks on Israel with increased ferocity using its new and improved longer range Iranian-made rockets smuggled in during the ceasefire. Israel was left with little choice but to retaliate against these attacks by targeting Hamas' military forces and weapons stockpiles. While any loss of life is deplorable, the fact remains that it was Hamas who forced Israel to resort to a military solution. Thus, I offer Israel my full support in the efforts to protect her citizens. If America fell under the same daily barrage of rocket attacks, we would not hesitate to strike back with military force, nor would we seek permission to take the necessary steps to protect our citizens. Madam Speaker, Israel has a legal, moral, and historical right to exist in peace with secure and defensible borders. While it is my earnest prayer that this current conflict may be resolved shortly through a durable and sustainable ceasefire, Israel cannot put at risk the security of her people by allowing Hamas to continue to export violence from Gaza. The loss of innocent civilian life is tragic and it is deplorable that Hamas complicates Israel's attempts to avoid civilian casualties by stockpiling weapons in homes and in mosques and using public places like schools to launch their sinister attacks on Israel. The Palestinian people deserve better. Peace can never be achieved so long as terrorist groups like Hamas continue to operate. Israel has been our staunchest ally in the Middle East and a full partner in the global war against radical jihadists-- individuals who would destroy our Nation, our children, our values, and the very existence of Western civilization. We must continue to support Israel's right to defend herself against those who seek to destroy her and continue to support efforts to bring a lasting peace between Israel and her neighbors. Madam Speaker, I support H. Res. 34 and Israel's right to defend herself from attack.