Cynthia Lummis

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Our deficit will soar to $1.8 trillion this year. The President's budget will triple our debt in 10 years and still under this bill be PAYGO-compliant. That is how disingenuous this bill is. This bill is so disingenuous that they didn't even allow it to go through the Budget Committee for fear, perhaps, that the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee might come up with something more reasonable. Instead, it is the ranking member that had to come up with something more reasonable. Families in Wyoming and across the Nation don't have the luxury of exempting 40 percent of their budget from balancing. But this PAYGO bill does. Forty percent of the budget is off the table. It doesn't have to play the PAYGO game. This is sleight of hand. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject this bill, which falls woefully short of its goals. Let's slow entitlement growth. Let's control Congress' insatiable appetite for spending. Let's pass the Paul Ryan alternative.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, ``where are the jobs?'' could be answered in one word, in my State of Wyoming. We were hiring people when our energy industry was robust from other States that were losing jobs, like Michigan. But the cap-and-trade bill that passed this House last week changed coal bonus payments from being paid over 5 years to now being paid in one lump-sum payment. We are going to destroy jobs in Wyoming. So the people who moved from Michigan to Wyoming to find good-paying jobs are now going to have to return to Michigan or stay in Wyoming and be unemployed. It is because of the activities of this Congress. This Congress has not been happy to watch States like Michigan suffer. They have decided to make States like Wyoming, that were producing energy for this country, suffer right alongside States like Michigan. Our State, which had a healthy economy before cap-and-trade, before the Obama presidency, is now suffering just like the rest of the Nation. Our unemployment has doubled in Wyoming, Mr. Speaker.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. I thank the gentleman from Utah for yielding. The chart he shows is exactly right. The fact that Wyoming chose to develop its mining resources and Montana chose a path that retarded the development of its mining resources is the difference in the teacher salaries, as pointed out in that chart. We have been blessed in Wyoming by having low unemployment and it created an opportunity, until recently, for people from other States who have suffered job losses to find gainful employment and make a new life in Wyoming. A number of families have relocated, especially from Michigan, to the State of Wyoming, and predominantly the community of Gillette. Gillette, Wyoming, has become Wyoming's third-largest city and is growing in a way that brings young families vibrancy, activity, and the arts and recreation to a wonderful Wyoming community in northeast Wyoming. It's brought a lot of new people to Wyoming from Michigan looking for a new life and looking for work. Many of them came from the automobile industry and manufacturing industries and mining industries, quite frankly, that were devastated due to the economic downturn. But they were able to find jobs in Wyoming, and we're so happy to have them. Then, along comes Waxman-Markey, a bill that creates a national energy tax and a bill that creates a tremendous threat, especially to coal mining jobs. Jobs in the Wyoming mining industry are high paying. Eighty-six percent higher than the average wage in the State. The average annual wage in the mining industry in Wyoming was $73,000 in 2007. It is an extraordinarily liveable wage in Wyoming. But, if you look at the total coal mining jobs in the U.S. and the changes in policy under Waxman-Markey and other bills going through this Congress, the outlook for those Michigan residents who have proudly relocated to Wyoming is not very prosperous. Job losses related to Waxman-Markey, optimistic projections, total U.S. job loss in 5 years: 14,000 jobs lost in coal mining alone. A pessimistic number for job losses 5 years from now in coal mining alone: 35,000 jobs. Let's project it out because, as you know, Waxman-Markey doesn't take effect completely until the year 2050, but let's just go out 10 years and 15 years. The projected loss in jobs in 10 years due to Waxman-Markey, under the most optimistic scenario that can be put together: 20,000 jobs lost in coal mining alone. And the pessimistic number: 67,000 jobs. That's the entire population of my community of Cheyenne, and then some. Of course, 20 years out the optimistic job loss in coal alone: 50,000 people. And the pessimistic number: 125,000 people in coal alone. These are not jobs that can be replaced by green jobs. These green jobs are not projected to pay 86 percent higher than the average wage in my State. Not only is the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, the national energy tax, an attack on coal-producing States around the Nation, but other bills going through this Congress are having the same consequence. Let's take, for example, the Interior Appropriations bill that just passed the House. It had a provision in it that when a company acquires a Federal lease to mine more coal, they will pay a bid bonus payment. That occurs now. The problem is, these bid bonus payments are such a large amount of money that they have been spread out over 5 years so the companies can borrow less money or use production that they're currently accomplishing to pay in 5-year increments for those big coal bid bonus payments. Under the Interior Appropriations bill that just passed this House, they will have to pay that all up front. These are staggeringly large numbers, in the tens of millions and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars. Companies in this financial crisis cannot borrow those kinds of moneys. Consequently, there will be companies that will not bid, thereby reducing the receipts to the American taxpayer when there's not competitive bidding for the coal or there may be no bids at all because no company can borrow enough money to pay the entire 5-year payment up front. One little amendment in an enormous bill that has tremendous consequences to coal mining jobs went through without discussion, and there are many such amendments in these bills every day that are an attack on jobs in this country, an attack on jobs in my State. The attack on jobs in the Appalachian States is unbelievable under the cap- and-trade bill. If I were in an Appalachian State, I would be even more concerned than I am for my State of Wyoming, and as the number one coal-producing State in the country, I am tremendously concerned about the loss of jobs. These policies are not good for America. They're not good for my State. They're not good for the West, and they're certainly not good for the hardworking people of America. I thank Mr. Bishop of Utah for allowing me the time to speak this evening.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding. I am from Wyoming, a State that has many wild horses on its public lands. I also have a degree in animal science, and I may be the only Member of this body who has ridden a BLM wild horse. My sister adopted two. This bill is not respectful of the grass resource. Let's talk about the ecology and the environment of the plains of this great country. Wild horses graze differently than cattle, sheep, elk, and deer. And the reason is they have a solid hoof; whereas, buffalo, elk, deer, and cattle have a split hoof. When a solid-hoofed animal is pounding our fragile soils in the West, they are tamping or compacting that soil so it does not accept water that is needed to sustain very shallow, very fragile topsoil and the important diversity of grass species that are supported and are needed by every animal that grazes those lands and every endangered and threatened species that uses those same lands. Furthermore, wild horses are there year-round. Livestock is only there at certain times of the year. Wild horses that were not native to these lands, in the spring, create tremendous damage when the thawing occurs that creates great rises and disruptions of the soil. Furthermore, when they graze, they pull plants out from the roots. Some of these species are, themselves, threatened and endangered grass and flowering plant species. That is why the Wyoming Nature Conservancy has opposed this bill. Let me read you what the Wyoming Nature Conservancy has to say: H.R. 1018 is an affront to efforts that have united conservation and ranch interests to achieve real, on-the-ground results throughout the West. Western rangeland supports population of native plants, wildlife, livestock, and wild horses. It is our position that effective management of this rangeland must be based on science, not emotion. This bill is based on emotion and not science. Furthermore, when flies congregate on wild horses in the summer, the horses tend to gather closely and try to roll to prevent the flies from staying on them and laying their eggs. Consequently, they're destroying sage grass habitat. Sage grass is a threatened species that is headed for the endangered species status if we do not control the activity of species that interfere with the recovery of the sage grass. In other words, this bill is elevating wild horses above threatened and endangered species, above all the plant and animal species that share the same habitat in the West, and this is inappropriate land management, grass management. It creates an unsustainable situation. That is why Wyoming's Democrat Governor has also opposed the bill. Governor Dave Freudenthal of Wyoming: H.R. 1018, to be frank, props up a program in need of sweeping reform. The current adoption program is full and is not responsive to the real issues of wild horse management. By increasing expensive holding facilities where many of these animals live out their lives because they are unadoptable, H.R. 1018 ignores the reality that wild horse and burro populations are out of control and doesn't get to the real problems that cripple our ability to truly manage these animals. Furthermore, Wyoming's highly respected premier Game and Fish Department: Simply put, we are very concerned that expanding the management of free-roaming horses and burros to all public lands would have devastating impacts to the long-term sustainability of the public's fish and wildlife resources and their habitats in the West. The list goes on and on of opponents. These opponents are people that manage fish and wildlife. These are people who manage grass resources. These are people who have boots-on-the-ground experience and know that you cannot elevate one nonnative species over native species of plants and animals and have an ecologically sustainable grass resource and prairie system. Chairman Rahall, I have great respect for your knowledge of the mining laws that are so important to my State and your State, but I can tell you respectfully, Mr. Chairman, that wild horses are a problem in Wyoming, and I'm very hopeful that you will choose not to import the problem to your State of West Virginia. But if you do, you will find, of course, that you can sustain mammals in terms of a number of mammals per acre. In Wyoming, it's the number of acres per mammal, and it can vary anywhere from 35 acres to sustain one mammal to over 100. Because of that, the consequences of overgrazing are enormous. Today's population of wild horses stands at approximately 36,000, and we know that the wild horse program stipulates that the total population of wild horses on public land should not exceed about 28,000 in order to promote a thriving ecological balance. Mr. Chairman, we are talking about ecological balance. Yes, this is an expensive program, and I concur with the remarks of my ranking member from Washington. But I want to emphasize the disrespect that this bill places on our sensitive, fragile grass resources in the West that, during times of drought and during times of heavy pressure, are unavailable to sustain this feral horse population, nonnative, that is in need of control.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. I rise in honor of today's guest chaplain, Pastor Shawn Kumm. He is joining us from Laramie, Wyoming, where he has served the congregation at the Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church for 13 years. Originally from Iowa, Pastor Kumm settled in Wyoming in 1996. He has held two offices in the Wyoming District of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, first as secretary to the board of directors, followed by his nomination in 2003 to vice president of the synod, a position which he currently holds. Pastor Kumm and his wife, Barbie, have two children, his son, Nickoli, and his daughter, Alexandra, who joins him here today. Pastor Kumm has provided invaluable help to the members of his church and my constituency. I thank him for his positive impact, leadership, and service to the community and wish him the best as his congregation continues to grow with God's blessing. I also want to acknowledge Representative Jeff Fortenberry, who joins me here today, and Pastor Kumm's parents, who reside in Representative Fortenberry's district.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 614, a bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal to the Women Airforce Service Pilots of World War II. As an original cosponsor of a similar measure in the House, I would like to give special recognition to Betty Cozzens, one of my constituents from Cody--and one of the 300 remaining Women Airforce Service Pilots. We all owe these heroic women a debt of gratitude. In the 16 months that the Women Airforce Service Pilots existed, over 1,000 of them served their country with pride. The Congressional Gold Medal is one of the most distinguished forms of recognition that Congress can bestow. It is an expression of public gratitude on behalf of the nation--to these women, for their service in a time of need. The Women Airforce Service Pilots forged reform in the U.S. Armed Forces in regard to women in service, flying on every type of assignment flown by the male Army Air Forces pilots, except combat. I would like to express my gratitude to Betty and her fellow pilots for their trailblazing service, being the first women in history to fly American military aircraft.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. Absolutely. I think the Americans have the perception that Big Oil is who is recovering these natural resources; but even those firms hire very small, literally mom-and-pop operations, five and six employees to go out and drill the drilling, to do some environmental compliance, to do the surveying, and to complete those wells, and do the fracturing of the deep seams that are required to cause the gas to flow into a natural gas well. These are very small operators. As I said, in Wyoming alone, over 350 businesses. Yet what we see on the horizon taxwise through the national energy tax that's being called cap-and-trade would be utterly devastating to those businesses.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I thank the gentleman from Missouri for pulling us together this evening for this discussion. In Wyoming, our economy is very much based in the energy industry because we have coal, oil, gas, uranium, wind, solar, biomass, and that is the mainstay of our economy by far. So as we watch the 350 to 375 very small businesses that are drilling for oil and gas and see the legislation that is coming before this Congress at the behest of the Democratic Party, it will devastate our businesses.

Mrs. LUMMIS. Not only are we producing the cleanest burning hydrocarbon that there is, natural gas, but we are doing it in a way that makes us less dependent on foreign energy. And what we are seeing in this Congress are policies that will actually make us more dependent on foreign energy at a time----

Mrs. LUMMIS. And to the gentleman from Missouri, we are also proposing in this Congress to tax drilling costs, to raise the taxes on the brackets, to do away with the death tax, to put the recovery of natural gas under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Virtually every time I turn around, almost every day here, we are doing something that will impair our ability to produce our own natural resources. And it's not just in Wyoming, there have been these fabulous new finds of natural gas that run up both sides of the Appalachian Mountains all the way from Pennsylvania clear to the Southern States. All of those States could have new natural gas production, the cleanest burning hydrocarbon, that reduces our need for foreign energy, that reduces the out-migration of jobs, it keeps them here, it grows them here. It grows revenue for those States. I can tell you, as our State treasurer in Wyoming for 8 years, we had, just off interest income off State investments, the largest source of income for our State's general fund from one source, interest income off State investments. And all of those State investments, every one of them, came from severance taxes on oil, gas, coal, uranium.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I thank the gentleman. In Wyoming, we have had surpluses in our budget for the last 7 years, and it is because of the explosive growth in the production of energy. It has made our unemployment among the lowest in the Nation. In fact, there were times during the last 7 years that we have had, statistically, zero unemployment. Incredible. While I was running for this position, I stopped at a fast-food place to get an iced tea late at night, and they offered me a job and my daughter a job at this fast- food place because they are so much in need of employees. Wyoming is unique in that regard, and it is because we are producing domestic energy. And there are new discoveries of domestic natural gas all over the United States. The Balkan in North Dakota is fantastic. It is producing wealth for people who have been farming at that very narrow margin of profitability, 0 to 4 percent, for years.

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. We have other Members who are not here tonight who I'd like to mention. One was mentioned earlier by Mr. Rooney. Duncan Hunter, a member of our freshman class from California, quit his job after 9/11 to serve in the Marine Corps. He has served three combat tours, including two in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. And along with Mr. Rooney and Mr. Coffman of Colorado, who took unpaid leave from the Colorado State House to serve in the first Gulf War and gave up being Colorado State treasurer for a tour of duty in Iraq--and I was Wyoming State treasurer at the same time Mr. Coffman was State treasurer and at the same time when another of our fellow freshmen, Lynn Jenkins, was the State treasurer in Kansas. We were proud of our colleague, Mr. Coffman, for leaving his job as Colorado State treasurer to do a tour of duty in Iraq. The experience of our servicemen and -women in this Congress is invaluable, and I applaud them and appreciate their efforts. I want to call on Mr. Rooney one more time to discuss our specific concerns about the issue that prevents all of us from being here tonight, that being the fact that an amendment has been placed on a military funding bill that is not germane. Would you care to elaborate further? And then I would like to yield to Mr. Thompson. Well, the bill that we had originally sent to the Senate was just a clean war funding bill that the President asked us for and that we delivered as a House of Representatives to the Senate. I did not serve in politics before running for Congress, so all this is new. But unfortunately, by the time it came back from the Senate to us, it had an additional amendment on it which included funding for the IMF, which is basically our borrowing money from somewhere else or printing money to loan it to another country. And that might seem ridiculous to a lot of people that may be listening, since everybody knows that America is going through tough times right now. People in my district are really hurting. The middle class needs help. They need tax cuts. They need to feel that their job is secure. They need to feel that the Federal Government is helping them, not impeding them. And to think that we are going to borrow or print money to send abroad, some of it to people that we might not necessarily want to lend money to, and have to put that on the backs of our servicemen and -women, because they know that it will be difficult for us as Republicans to vote against it, is really, in my opinion, shameful in a lot of ways. I understand there are differences in ideology. There are differences in principles about what governing should be. But if we have a clean military funding bill, then it should stand on its own. If you have a clean IMF bill to loan money to foreign countries, then it should stand on its own. The majority is the majority. If it is a good idea, it will pass. They have the Congress. They have the White House. Why should it be attached to something that has nothing to do with funding our soldiers abroad? I recently got back from Iraq and Afghanistan. Recently I visited Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. And the one thing that impressed me more than anything else is the men and women that wear our uniform. They never talk about politics. They never talk about policy or how they stand on certain issues. They are there to do a job. They are putting themselves in harm's way so we can stand here tonight and discuss these issues and talk about what we think is best for the future. To think that politics is being played with the ammunition that goes in their guns or the body armor or the vehicles that they drive or anything that they have to rely on from us as a Congress to pay for what we are sending them there to do is just unconscionable to me. And it is something that I hope, as you said earlier, has been delayed, and hopefully that delay is felt, continues on to next week, and maybe we can reconsider what we are doing and what we talk about. Politics should have no place when it comes to funding what we send our men and women in uniform to do abroad. Whether you agree with these wars, whether you agree with the war on terror, whether you agree with anything that we are doing, we are sending them there. We should give them a clean bill. And as of right now, we are not. But maybe, just maybe, cooler heads will prevail and we will give them a clean bill for what they are doing and what they are serving us for.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I would like to acknowledge two other Members of our Republican freshman class who have also served in the military: John Fleming, who is a family physician from Louisiana, was also a medical officer in the U.S. Navy; and Brett Guthrie, one of our colleagues from Kentucky, served as a field artillery officer in the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) at Fort Campbell. And we have other veterans as well. I want to turn now to a subject that is on the front burner in Congress, House and Senate, both energy and health care. And we have a wonderful array of talent in our class on both subjects. We have two medical care providers with us to discuss that issue. I know I was listening briefly to the Progressive Caucus before we had this little opportunity to visit this evening, and they were espousing the benefits that they see in providing health care by way of a government-funded option. I might point out before I turn it over to Mr. Thompson that government payers, and this was an independent study, found out that Medicaid and Medicare have shifted a total of $89 billion per year in costs on to other payers. As a result, families with private health, and I'm quoting from the study, families with private health insurance spend nearly $1,800 more per year, $1,512 in higher premiums and $276 in increased beneficiary cost sharing to cover the below-market reimbursement levels paid by Medicare and Medicaid. My concern is, if we go to a government option that is side by side with private sector insurance, that it will be less expensive and it will recruit people to gravitate from private insurance to this government system. But the reason that it may be cheaper for the government to provide insurance is that they are continuing to shift costs and to fail to reimburse providers accurately and adequately. I know in my State of Wyoming, where health care is the number one issue right now, that there are physicians who are no longer accepting Medicare and Medicaid patients. They cannot afford to accept them anymore because reimbursement levels in rural hospitals and to rural physicians are so low. And if that is the manner in which our country intends to get ahold of the cost of health care, we are in big trouble. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I look forward to that discussion. Another of our colleagues, Dr. Bill Cassidy from Louisiana, in his practice, co- founded a health clinic to match uninsured patients with doctors who provide services free of charge. So we have some very qualified, very caring medical care providers and physicians in our class, and I'm proud to serve with them. Of course, Doctor Phil, you are among them. Would you please comment on this subject.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I might mention the three officers of our freshman Republican class who couldn't join us this evening, and two of our more unique members who I hope will be able to join us if we have the opportunity to do this again. Our class president is Steve Austria of Ohio. He was a force in getting Jessica's Law and the Adam Walsh Child Protection Safety Act passed into State law. Our representative on the Steering Committee, Gregg Harper of, Mississippi, is an attorney with a child whom he has brought to share his unique health concerns with us. And we've all learned a lot from him. And of course, our Policy Committee representative, Jason Chaffetz, who is a former Division I football player at Brigham Young University, my University of Wyoming's nemesis, but a dear colleague of ours, and two wonderful freshmen who are plowing new ground. The very first Vietnamese American to serve in the United States Congress, Joseph Cao, born in Saigon, Vietnam, escaped at the age of 8 to the United States, lost his home during Katrina, and fought to return electricity and telecommunications to Louisiana residents after Katrina. We also boast the youngest Member of this U.S. House of Representatives, Aaron Schock, the youngest school board president, Illinois State Rep, and a Member of Congress with whom we are privileged to serve. I thank the gentlemen for joining me this evening. I thank our Speaker, the gentleman from Virginia, who was very patient with his fellow freshmen colleagues from the other party, and look forward to the opportunity to have a bipartisan freshman discussion at an early opportunity.

Mrs. LUMMIS. The gentleman from Minnesota also was a leader in his State legislature. Observations comparing the two?

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, my name is Cynthia Lummis. I am the Member of Congress from Wyoming. I am a freshman and a Republican. This is the first time that the freshman Republicans have engaged in a Special Order, and it's my privilege to be joined by members of the Republican freshmen. This is our opportunity to share with you our perspective on these first 5 months in Congress that we have shared together as freshmen, to tell you a little bit about ourselves and about our views about this process, about where we have been in the last 5 months and where we think, as fiscal conservatives, the Nation should be going instead. And I'm so pleased to be joined, first of all, by one of my freshmen colleagues, who has a very interesting background. Glenn Thompson, from Pennsylvania, is in addition to his professional career a volunteer firefighter and has volunteered for the Boy Scouts for 30 years. I yield to him to talk to you about why he chose to run for Congress and what he is accomplishing here, and how he feels that if this Congress could work together more closely on fiscal conservatism, how this Nation would currently be better off and on the road to recovery. I yield to Mr. Thompson.

Mrs. LUMMIS. I have the privilege of serving on the House Budget Committee, and yesterday Dr. Bernanke testified at our hearing and expressed his concern over the need for Congress to develop a plan to come up with a way to deal with these debts and our deficit issues. They are part of a risk that is presented to our country long term if we don't begin to address them now, and after passing a $700-plus billion stimulus package, over $1.1 trillion when you consider the interest on top of that; also, the $410 billion budget for the current fiscal year; and then approving in the Budget Committee, over the objection of all of the Republicans a nearly $3.6 trillion budget for the next fiscal year, I firmly agree with the gentleman from Pennsylvania about the concerns that we all have as freshmen, Republicans, for the tremendous debt and the tremendous deficit that is being undertaken. I would like to ask a couple of other colleagues to join in this conversation. Next, calling on Blaine Luetkemeyer of Missouri, who is another member of our freshman Republican class who is the rarest of rare commodities in Congress in that he has operated and continues to operate a small business. He currently operates a 160-acre farm after serving as a leader in a number of other small businesses. And if any entity within this Congress does not get the attention it deserves, I would suggest that it is small business. And I yield to my colleague, Mr. Luetkemeyer from Missouri.

Mrs. LUMMIS. That is exactly what I hear when I go home. Wyoming people want Wyoming common sense. It is the same kind of common sense that you discussed was evident among people that were experiencing a tragedy in your district and who got together and solved the problem, and that is something that we as a class of freshman Republicans hope to do as well. We represent 20 States. We span in age from 28 years old, our youngest Member, to 64 years old. Five are physicians or work in health care, and as Mr. Thompson mentioned, he works in health care. One of our physicians is with us this evening, Dr. Phil Roe, and we will be visiting with him shortly. We have two college athletes, six with military backgrounds among our 22 freshmen Republicans, four former State treasurers and 16 State legislators or statewide officers. And I know Mr. Luetkemeyer was a State legislator, as was I, as is our next freshman who's going to visit with us, a gentleman from Minnesota, Erik Paulsen, and I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota who first I might mention still finds time to teach Sunday school at his Lutheran church, Missouri Synod, of which I am also a member, and who as State legislator helped eliminate Minnesota's $4.5 billion State budget deficit without raising taxes. So this is someone that we desperately need working to pull off a similar success story here in Washington. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mrs. LUMMIS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. LUMMIS. You know, that is very much a bipartisan frustration right now. I read of Senators and other House Members who are tremendously concerned about their local dealers, GM, Chrysler, having to give up a profitable business because of this takeover. Both sides of the aisle on both sides of the Capitol building share in their tremendous frustration over the manner in which the bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler are playing out. I want to give a moment to another member of our freshman class who has joined us, Dr. Roe. The gentleman from Tennessee served as a doctor for 2 years in the U.S. Army Medical Corps and has delivered close to 5,000 babies. He also has been the mayor of his small town and was very successful in using their landfill as a source of energy for that community. And being a mayor of a town of people of very modest means requires an amount of creativity that is unique in this country. Welcome, Dr. Roe. Please join our discussion.

Mrs. LUMMIS. Will the gentleman yield? I understand that in the old Senate Chamber that still exists in this building that you can go see Congressman Crockett's desk. Is that the case?

Mrs. LUMMIS. Thank you for your statement. Now, we have six freshmen here of the Republican class and, indeed, a seventh member in the Chair. Our Speaker this evening is a member of the majority party, a Democrat. It would be really fascinating at some point to have a Special Order some evening with our Democrat colleagues who are freshmen as well, because I think many of us came to Congress with a different perspective, with a new perspective, regardless of party, about how we think America can move forward. As freshmen Republicans, we did support legislation that would stimulate economic growth. It would have cost $315 billion less than the bill that Congress adopted, the Democratic bill; and it would have created twice as many jobs. In my district in Wyoming, it would have created 50 percent more jobs; but in many districts that are suffering mightily, it created twice as many jobs. That because we really targeted and took to heart what President Obama asked us to do, and that was to be targeted and temporary. Unfortunately the bill that was adopted was neither targeted--it was a shotgun approach to economic stimulus--and it is not temporary. Many provisions in that bill are built into the ongoing spending of government and inflate the costs of government, as Dr. Roe pointed out earlier, by adding to the baseline of expenditures that will go up and up and up in the future. One of the things that Representative Rooney just mentioned that is so frustrating to all of us, I think on both sides of the aisle, is seeing legislation that is not germane to the subject of the bill being attached to the bill. In the case that Representative Rooney was just discussing with us, it was the funding for our military men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan and in Pakistan, and the addition to that bill would lend money or guarantee money to the International Monetary Fund. No connection whatsoever. And the IMF funding has created a situation where we're not voting tomorrow on that bill because there are not sufficient votes to pass it by virtue of an amendment that was not germane being added to a bill. In the Wyoming legislature you cannot do that. You cannot amend a nongermane topic to a piece of legislation or it is ruled out of order. If that rule were in effect here, we would see much better legislation. We would see people having a better opportunity to vet that legislation, discuss that legislation and then vote with their heart rather than having to grit their teeth and vote for a couple things that are just not a good pairing. I can give an example of where it pained some people on the other side of the aisle. I am a big supporter of Second Amendment rights, but there was an amendment put on a credit card bill to allow concealed weapon permits in national parks. I firmly support allowing concealed weapons in national parks because they are so part and parcel to the State of Wyoming and to our right to bear arms, but attaching it to a credit card bill is wrong. It's just wrong.

Mrs. LUMMIS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. LUMMIS

Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.