Tim Murphy

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Recently, the Pentagon proposed a new medal, the Distinguished Warfare Medal, to recognize those members of the armed services who operate the drones, which serve on vital missions over war areas. That's a good thing. However, they've also recommended that it take precedence over and be rated above the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart. It is of great concern to a number of us in the House that this has taken place because we believe that those who fight and have the wounds of battle should have their medals take precedence over them. I ask all Members to be in support of H.R. 833 and to sign on as cosponsors so that we can correct this problem and work together to make sure that the Bronze Star and Purple Heart are kept in their rightful order of medals, because these things do matter to our military.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Today, we honor the memory of Private First Class Wayne Alderson of Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, a World War II hero awarded the Combat Infantry Badge, Silver Star, Bronze Star, and Purple Heart for his courageous actions during the Rhineland Campaign of 1945. PFC Alderson died on February 22, 2013. At 86, Wayne was a member of our Greatest Generation and a great American. This son of southwestern Pennsylvania lived a life of purpose and sacrifice, and remains an inspiration to those who knew him. Born on June 7, 1926, Wayne Alderson entered the United States Army as an 18-year-old on August 31, 1944. His service would help bring Nazism to its knees, and PFC Alderson would become the first American soldier to advance into Germany across the forbidding, tank-protected Siegfried line on March 15, 1945. In the course of this assault, PFC Alderson, serving as a scout for B Company, 7th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division, would single- handedly destroy two machine gun emplacements, attack pockets of German snipers, and fight house-to-house at night before capturing and taking three German prisoners. At considerable personal risk, he led the prisoners back to headquarters, where vital information was obtained by the Allies about the Siegfried line defenses. Then, on March 18, in Rieschweiler, Germany, the 18-year-old private would lead a new assault against enemy forces. His company pierced the German line but was cut off by enemy soldiers. Fearing the Germans were about to launch a counterattack that would wipe out his men, PFC Alderson and two other soldiers volunteered to lead a surprise assault and disappeared down a long zigzag spider trench behind a dense warren of fortifications. The assault would ultimately help melt German defenses along the Siegfried line and leave PFC Alderson's face permanently scarred, carrying the shrapnel of a bitter, closed-quarters firefight. The small and vulnerable patrol engaged the larger German force in combat at point-blank range. PFC Alderson, fully exposed and vastly outnumbered, charged with his men, inflicting 12 casualties on the advancing enemy. With the Germans now in retreat, Wayne was seriously injured when a grenade exploded at his feet, blasting shrapnel and debris into his face. Wayne crashed face first into the mud from the blow. One of his fellow soldiers attempted to flip him over to prevent him from suffocating to death. A sniper took that soldier's life. The shooting over, PFC Alderson, suffering from a head wound, crawled back through the trenches to brief his company commander on the events that had just transpired. The company commander later surveyed the battle scene and determined the three men had killed at least 35 German soldiers. Wayne was discharged from service on October 6, 1945, with the rank of private first class. Wayne's leadership continued after the war. He helped resolve a conflict between labor and management at Pittron Steel, retold in the book ``Stronger than Steel,'' a dispute that threatened to shutter the company but instead saved jobs and changed Pittron's corporate culture. Fittingly, after this episode, Wayne went on to found a consulting firm called Value of the Person, which he ran for the last 40 years. Value of the Person grew out of Wayne Alderson's unique theory of management, stressing the importance of respect and responsibility between management and its workers--commonsense ideas that too often can become lost in the hum of modern life. These ideas became the basis of a book co-written with his daughter, ``Theory R Management,'' in 1994. On May 20, 2007, I had the privilege of presenting Wayne Alderson, the hero of the Rhineland campaign, with the Silver Star when he was inducted into the veterans memorial Hall of Valor. PFC Alderson is survived by his wife, Nancy, of 60 years; sisters, Lillie Shannon and Jeanne Alderson of Canonsburg; daughter, Nancy McDonnell; and a grandson, Patrick Wayne McDonnell. Wayne Alderson always put his country first. Now it is time for PFC Alderson's country to recognize his bravery and place him among the first rank of those Americans who helped liberate Europe and beat back the twin scourges of fascism and Nazism. It is in this spirit that we recognize Wayne Alderson today. The way Wayne lived his life with continued selfless courage and determination gave Americans a true hero to mentor the next generation. Indeed, Wayne Alderson's influence will have a lasting impact on that next generation. And through that, he lives on. On behalf of a grateful Nation, we thank Wayne Alderson for his service and his life for his country.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, thank you for your service and your friendship to our country. I've been watching the media, Mr. Speaker, and hearing a lot of distortion of what happened in the House Chamber yesterday. Let's recall that on December 31 at midnight, taxes went up for every taxpayer massively, the fiscal cliff. By the end of the evening, the House came together, working with the Senate, and reduced taxes for 99 percent of American taxpayers. We kept taxes lower for dividend income, capital gains. We maintained a higher child tax credit. We helped keep the marriage penalty from hurting families. We did all this in a permanent way. This is a big win. We have a lot of work to do, but that was a big win. The President also promised that he would work with us to have further cuts in spending. We should hold him to that promise on both sides of the aisle. We have several serious issues to come in this 113th Congress. We have to deal with the debt ceiling, spending cuts, implementation and regulations in the health care law, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government. It's easy for people to look at any piece of legislation--I actually challenge people to find some piece of legislation here that was perfect. Any major bill has flaws. Even a rose has thorns, as they say. Let's understand that we will see success when we work together, not when we continue to snipe at each other's heels. The challenges before us will only be dealt with by the courage we find within us to find the common ground between us and fight together for a better America.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. While our Nation still grieves the loss of so many children and teachers and others in Connecticut, it is a time for Congress to begin a thoughtful dialogue on what we can do to deal with these mass-casualty incidences in our country. They have been going on for some time; but perhaps when we see the faces of children, principals, teachers and others, it will burn upon our hearts and motivate us to take further action. I want to make sure, Mr. Speaker, that Congress takes the appropriate action in a thoughtful, willful, determined way and that it doesn't jump to quick conclusions as if simple fixes will prevent this from happening. First, to the parents of children across America who are asking questions, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to offer some of this advice, and also in my background as a psychologist, it's important for people to remember this: Parents should be asking their children what they have heard about the incident. We should listen to their concerns and their emotions. We should answer their questions with age-appropriate information. We should support and comfort and reassure them of their safety at home and at school. We should observe and watch for symptoms of problems, such as changes in appetite, such as sleep issues, worries, aggression, anger, and sadness. We should protect our children from other media exposure and information that creates more fear and problems; It is important for parents to call for professional help for their children if they are showing some concerns and symptoms of this beyond simple adjustment. For parents who have children who also have anger disorders, it is important for parents to review with school personnel locally how their schools are handling security and providing counseling assistance at school; It is important for parents to pay attention to their own concerns and worries and to, over time, keep watch as concerns and symptoms may come later--even for those who are far distant from the location where this occurred. For my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, I recommend that we remove the stigma surrounding mental illness in our talk about it and that we, first and foremost, address this as a mental health issue. We must commit to expanding access for those who are unable to receive treatment. If parents are not sure what to do, we need to provide them with information and assistance to get their children help. We have to review a wide range of things, such as television violence and video games in relation to violent behavior. We have to make sure that we are reviewing research that is being done with the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Mental Health, and our universities across the country. What we do not yet have is an answer to understanding how we can accurately predict those who will perform violent acts. It is also important to understand that, for mentally ill persons, it is a diagnosable and treatable condition, that in the vast majority of cases there is no violence involved, and that, as a matter of fact, those with mental illness are 11 times more likely to be the victims of aggression rather than the sources of aggression. We can understand some of the risks: these often times are people between the ages of 15 and 25, and they generally tend to be males, intelligent; but we need to make sure we are identifying and providing resources for care for the families. At the Federal Government level, I also recommend that Congress use a thoughtful approach in reviewing every single mental health program that we fund. In the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, the Department of Defense, we need a thorough and thoughtful review of what we spend and how it is spent even if it gets down to the level of family and community. Understand, for example, in the Children's Mental Health Services program, it was funded at $117 million in fiscal year 2012. The President has proposed a cut of nearly $29 million of this; and with sequestration, it will be cut by a further $8 million. Should we make those cuts? Is that a program that is using this money effectively and efficiently? Let's talk about these in a candid and honest way with Members of Congress and the community. Let's also understand that about 58 million Americans suffer from a mental disorder in a given year. About one in four people will have some diagnosable illness; and if one seeks treatment, one can get help. We also need to understand that, with psychotropic medication, over 70 percent of the time it is prescribed by a non-psychiatrist. With persons who have other problems with that--drug interactions--or who have other problems not quite dealt with, it is important to make sure that insurance plans funded by the Federal Government, State governments, and private insurers are appropriately allowing people to be treated for this. We have many directions in which we need to go on this. Let's make sure we don't go in the wrong direction.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman. Madam Speaker, may I add my accolades to your work for the people of Missouri, particularly my ancestors who founded Murphy's Settlement, now Farmington, in your district. You've done them well. Four years ago, Lorraine Babich of Washington County, Pennsylvania, then age 73, suffered injuries so severe from a car accident that she will never fully recover. After the accident, Lorraine underwent a very difficult surgery. She was transferred to a rehabilitation facility, where she contracted Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus, otherwise known as MRSA. Sadly, Lorraine's condition has worsened. She now suffers from dementia and must receive 24/7 care at a nursing home. The physical pain in Lorraine's life is multiplied by the emotional pain of recent years. A year after the accident, Lorraine lost her husband; then, last year, her only child passed away. Lorraine's story is heartbreaking and tragic, and it's depressing to learn Medicare is working against Lorraine's interests. In the fall of 2010, Lorraine's family and the automobile insurer for the other driver in the accident reached a monetary settlement. The insurer agreed to pay Lorraine's medical bills, and Lorraine would also collect damages. First, Lorraine's health insurer--Medicare--had to be repaid, but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services won't tell Lorraine or the auto insurer how much is owed to the Medicare trust fund. The insurance company wants to reimburse Medicare and provide Lorraine with a settlement, but CMS's complicated bureaucracy is standing in the way. There are thousands of cases just like Lorraine's in congressional districts across the country. But we now have a chance to fix this problem and make sure Lorraine and her family receive what they are rightfully owed by passing H.R. 1845, which includes a bipartisan bill I introduced with Congressman Ron Kind. Our bill, the Strengthening Medicare and Repaying Taxpayers Act, or the SMART Act, will recoup billions of dollars owed by insurance companies to the Medicare trust fund quickly and eliminate waste within CMS. The SMART Act, which has nearly 140 bipartisan cosponsors and the support of trial lawyers, patient advocates, defense attorneys, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, requires that Medicare provide settling parties with accurate information about the total costs of medical bills when the parties announce a settlement is near. The Congressional Budget Office has looked at our bill and found it will save billions in Medicare. The current Medicare Secondary Payer bureaucracy is causing seniors to have their Social Security checks garnished and their Medicare coverage denied, through no fault of their own. Our bill fixes these issues and ensures bureaucracy does not stand in the way of a settlement. Right now, insurers are walking away from settlements because of the flaws in the Medicare Secondary Payer statute. When those settlements break down, seniors get nothing and the taxpayers are not repaid. By enacting this legislation, Congress can help Lorraine and thousands of senior citizens who are needlessly suffering because Medicare isn't operating effectively and efficiently. I want to thank Chairmen Upton and Camp, Ranking Members Waxman and Levin, and Congressman Kind for their support on this legislation. I want to extend a special thanks to their respective staffs for their hard work, particularly Robert Horne and Brad Grantz. Without them, this legislation wouldn't be moving forward. This is good government and saves taxpayers' money. I urge its adoption.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor Petty Officer First Class Nicholas Checque, a true hero who sacrificed his life in the most honorable of ways--to protect and save the life of another human being. His life was a testament to the core values of the United States Navy: honor, courage and commitment. On December 9, 2012, Petty Officer Checque embarked on a daring Special Forces operation in eastern Afghanistan to rescue a kidnapped American doctor from the Taliban in the Sarobi district near Kabul. A veteran of the Iraq war and decorated Navy SEAL, Petty Officer Checque died following critical injuries sustained on the successful mission to save the life of Dr. Joseph. A grateful Nation grieves for him and his family. Petty Officer Checque strived for excellence, Madam Speaker. As a Norwin High School student, peers described him as diligent and driven, always aware he would someday serve his country. He was a dedicated student and a wrestler. He consistently challenged himself to pursue excellence in everything he did. Such dedication to one's country was also carried on by Petty Officer Checque. That is truly remarkable, but it's also expected of a Navy SEAL. Among many commendations, Petty Officer Checque was awarded the Bronze Star, the Joint Service Commendation Medal, and the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation and Achievement Medals for service during combat, and now, the Purple Heart. The Bible reminds us that ``There is no greater love than to lay down one's life for one's friends.'' Through his incredible sacrifice, Petty Officer Checque not only exhibited his great love of country, but unwavering affection for his brothers and sisters. ``The Navy Hymn,'' also known as ``Eternal Father,'' has a verse added. I don't know the author, but it is fitting to recall now. It goes on to say: And when at length her course is run, her work for home and country done, of all the souls that in her sailed, let not one life in thee have failed; but hear from heaven our sailor's cry, and grant eternal life on high. To Petty Officer Checque, we all bid him fair winds and following seas for eternity. May he rest in peace, and may the Lord keep him and his family in his loving hands.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Speaking of saving money, here is an interesting story. Just 2 weeks after Texans in Randall County voted for Republican Barry Goldwater over their native son, Lyndon Johnson, in the Presidential race in the 1960s, the Pentagon announced Randall County's Air Force base was closing. Folks were ``flabbergasted'' said an Amarillo newspaper columnist. The Air Force had just made millions in investments at the base, but now airmen and equipment were moving to a nearby county that supported Johnson. It was this kind of abuse of executive power that led Congress to write a new law ensuring we had proper oversight over base closures. In my Pennsylvania's 18th Congressional District, we're finding out why that law must be strengthened. Last week, I learned the Air Force is again attempting to shut down the 911th Airlift Wing, an Air Force Reserve base, for a reason that has nothing do with cost or military strategy. In fact, the 911th is one of the most lean and cost-effective bases in the country. How and why they can do this without congressional approval is interesting. The Air Force claims inaccurately there are fewer than 300 civilian employees authorized to be employed at the 911th, allowing the Pentagon to close the base without congressional review. The Pentagon, however, has invested over $50 million in improvements in the base, including new buildings in the last 5 years. The 911th, however, has lower overhead costs because emergency responses like fire and safety, air traffic control, security, runway maintenance, and land are provided by Pittsburgh International Airport for free. Hence, if the 911th were forced to in-source those activities, the number of authorized personnel would be hundreds more, and would far exceed the 300-person threshold. Thus, the Pentagon would be prevented from unilaterally closing it. Further, the Air Force Reserve would have to invest millions more in equipment and training if it was not provided for free, but the Air Force did not look at any of these numbers, and they did not review the cost of the space. The Pentagon is trying to close the base because they can, not because they should. In their haste to come up with a quick cut, it will cost the taxpayers over $100 million in coming years, and that is why Congress needs to have oversight. The House has passed a defense bill to prevent a suboptimal decision like this one in the future. The House bill includes language requiring the Pentagon to notify Congress about any base closure or transfer of troops impacting more than 1,000 uniform personnel. Unlike the way the Air Force is operating now, the Defense Department would have to include a justification for the reduction, an evaluation of the costs and benefits, and an evaluation of the local, economic, environmental, strategic, and operational consequences. By requiring significant reductions in uniform personnel to be included in the budget request, Congress will have two opportunities to review, block, or approve a base closure in the annual defense authorization bill and the defense appropriations bill. The Senate is nearing completion of its version of the defense bill today, and it's my hope that both Chambers will work to restore Congress' proper oversight authority. The issue facing Congress is not a new one. Since the 1960s, the executive branch has tried repeatedly to close bases for reasons other than the best interests of taxpayers or the military. The necessity of a strong base closure law giving Congress oversight of these decisions was perhaps best expressed in 1985 by Senator Carl Levin. He said: These protections against untrammeled executive power to close bases came because Members of this Senate and this Congress felt that the power to close bases had been abused and had been used as a club over Members of Congress. Today, it is the 911th, but tomorrow it could be a base in any Member's district. I urge my colleagues to support efforts to strengthen the base closure law.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. This morning, I rise with a heavy heart, but on behalf of a grateful Nation, to honor a soldier born and raised in southwestern Pennsylvania, who gave his life on September 14 in service to our country. This week, he returned to his home, the United States, where he will be laid to rest. Lieutenant Colonel Christopher Raible, commanding officer of Marine Attack Squadron 211, died in the assault on Camp Bastion, which is connected to the American-run base Camp Leatherneck, in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. It was a despicable attack by the Taliban that not only took the life of this dedicated, respected, and brave marine but that also resulted in the worst loss of U.S. military aircraft since the Vietnam war. But this morning, I rise so my colleagues, my constituents at home in Westmoreland County, and the entire Nation will know more about this courageous marine known as ``Otis,'' who commanded a Marine Harrier jet squadron. After graduating at the top of his class from Norwin High School, where he was a starting defensive back for the Knights, Lieutenant Colonel Raible earned his degree in civil engineering from Pittsburgh's prestigious Carnegie Mellon University. Following his college graduation, Raible joined the United States Marine Corps, and by 1998 had become a naval aviator. A natural leader, Raible rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel last summer, having received numerous military honors along the way, including a Meritorious Service Medal, 10 Strike- Flight awards, and a Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, to name just a few. In support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, Raible deployed many times to serve our Nation. Colonel Raible commanded the only Marine Harrier squadron in Afghanistan in which he flew over 2,000 hours in Harrier aircraft. A southwestern Pennsylvanian at heart, it should come as no surprise that Otis was known, while seated in the cockpit, to listen to the Steelers while flying in the skies over Iraq. But more than anything, Lieutenant Colonel Raible was a father, a husband, and a son; a proud dad of three children, ages 11, 9, and 2. Otis so loved and was loved by his family. As his mother Belvina of North Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, said, her son died defending all that he held dear. ``He was the best of the best,'' she said. Indeed, Mrs. Raible, he was. Today, we as a Nation say ``thank you'' to Lieutenant Colonel Raible and to his entire family. We're so grateful for your service and for your sacrifice protecting our freedom. Through your service, you have made your family and your Nation better. Through your sacrifice, you have made America stronger. Through your courage, you have made America proud. Many times, I'm sure you soared above the clouds where you could touch the face of God. Now you rest in his loving arms for eternity. Thank you, Colonel. Our Nation thanks you, as well.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentlelady from West Virginia. Thank you also for your tireless advocacy for coal as we are here fighting the war on coal. It's interesting. I remember when I was attending college at Wheeling Jesuit University. Oftentimes, for charitable activities, we'd go into the mountains of Appalachia and help families where coal mines had shut down because they were played out, and we'd seen the incredible poverty there. We also know that, over the last century, miners toiled for years in those coal patch towns and tried to make things safer, and they accomplished that. They worked for better wages, and they accomplished that. Now they're fighting for their very existence and their jobs and livelihoods. To add to what you're saying about the jobs here, this is not just coal miners. It's the manufacturers who make the longwall equipment-- the continuous miners, the rails, the wire, the ventilators, the elevators, the safety equipment. They are fighting for their jobs. It's the railroads, the trucks, the barges, the workers who make the rails, the hopper cars, the barges, the trucks who are there, fighting for their jobs. Where will they go? Really, this is not just an attack on some of the power plants. We may lose 175 or so initially. The goal is to shut down 400 power plants altogether. What will happen then? Now, this keeps the President's pledge that, if you want to use coal, it will bankrupt you, but it's also going to bankrupt these families when they can't pay their bills when their electric rates go up. They're already paying $3,000 more per year for their gasoline for their cars. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told the Democratic National Convention: Under President Obama's leadership, the U.S. moved forward with an all-of-the-above energy strategy--oil, gas, nuclear, hydro, biofuels, wind, geothermal, solar. All of it, he said. What's missing is coal. If we're not going to build a new power plant, that's also jobs not just for the miners. It means no jobs for the boilermakers, the electrical workers, the ironworkers, the steamfitters, the plumbers, the insulators, the carpenters, the laborers, the operating engineers, the cement masons, and the steelworkers. That means, down in southwestern Pennsylvania, in Greene County, where 43 percent of their income is coal, they won't have that income. Washington County will also suffer, and so many Americans will suffer. We need to be investing in new technologies to clean up coal and to clean up these power plants and rebuild them, not to shut them down.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I'll add a story here. I remember back in the 1970s, in Buffalo Creek, West Virginia, where a dam broke and wiped out the town. I remember going there to work with the Red Cross. In the late evening at Van High School, I was talking to a gentleman who had lost his home. He had said that, before the dam broke, the police had come down the street, and they'd said, Leave your homes. The dam has broken. He said he grabbed his kids, and they ran up the hill as fast as they could. As fast as he could run, the water was at his feet, and when he turned around, his home was gone; the town was gone; there was nothing left. In the darkness of that classroom late at night, I could hear him beginning to cry, and I said, But you have your family. He said, I know, and there is someone else in this town who has lost everything. He even lost his family. I said, Well, prayers and good luck helped you. He said, No. It was also the fact that we heard the same warnings. The difference was I listened, and he did not. We are at that same point, too. We are hearing about the existence of towns all throughout Appalachia and all throughout this Nation. We need to be mining American coal and using our ingenuity to clean it up, not shut it down, to help all these towns, to help the schools, and to help those families.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. White House adviser Larry Summers said it best. When one of Solyndra's own investors was astonished to learn his startup firm qualified for this massive DOE earmark, Summers replied the government is a ``crappy venture capitalist.'' Nearly 3 years later and $1 billion in losses to taxpayers later, isn't it clear the Department of Energy loan program has failed? Many of us want our country to implement a comprehensive, successful energy-independence strategy that uses clean coal, nuclear, clean natural gas, and other sources. That's why Chairman Upton's bill included an amendment I authored to have the GAO examine the kind of subsidies and assistance foreign governments give to their energy companies. But after an 18-month investigation by the committee, the truth is the current loan program, as it stands, cannot be salvaged. We found that the loopholes created in this program by thwarting the letter and spirit of the law have shaken its foundation. Solyndra was rushed, reckless, and political. It was rushed because the entire stimulus loan program was built to get money out the door quickly. The law originally said they had to pay it back, complete the projects, and the taxpayers had to be paid back first. These taxpayer safety nets were removed. Second, it was reckless. Officials at OMB, DOE, Treasury, and outside investment professionals all warned that Solyndra was doomed to fail. Even Solyndra employees questioned its longevity. Finally, it was political. Campaign bundler George Kaiser made 16 visits to the White House about Solyndra. This committee uncovered emails between Kaiser and White House officials on Solyndra. There were internal deliberations about how the White House could mask the bad news of Solyndra's bankruptcy. Those are the facts. It's time to turn out the lights on Solyndra and this DOE loan guarantee program. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment and support for the bill.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have no more speakers on this bill, and I'm prepared to close if the gentleman from North Carolina is prepared to close, as well.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 710) to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a hazardous waste electronic manifest system, as amended.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record on S. 710.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The enactment of S. 710 will enable the EPA to employ current technology to sharply reduce paperwork regulatory requirements at the same time it makes crucial information more accessible for States, first responders, and the public. When people create hazardous waste, we require them to carefully track the movement and disposition. That way we know that, when a drum full of some hazardous waste is removed from a factory, the same amount winds up where it belongs--in a proper disposal facility--and that none of it is tossed into a sewer or a vacant lot. But for years, guaranteeing this actually happened meant keeping up with the reporting requirement--filling out multiple copies of paper forms and mailing them to the EPA and State officials, as well as keeping paper copies at each place of business. The inefficiency of this system in today's electronic business-to- business world certainly stands out to anyone. In fact, we learned of a case when first responders arrived at the scene of a chemical plant fire and they needed to know what substances were inside the plant before they started fighting the fire. In the whole city, the only copies of the forms identifying the hazardous waste were inside the building and were consumed in the fire. Now, there has got to be a better way. With an electronic system, instead of filling out long forms and mailing them, the critically needed data, with a few computer key strokes, can be sent wherever it is needed. State regulators, first responders, and others will be able to pull it up on their computers and track the materials in real time. The changeover will not only save millions of dollars for regulated businesses, but quite frankly, it will save lives. So, even though the e-manifest system in S. 710 is funded by user fees, I want to note it will not be a burden on small businesses. Users pay only when and to the extent they file manifests. Otherwise, the new system will work like the old paper system, where the process to identify discrepancies in shipments is preserved. Mr. Speaker, S. 710 was a good bill when it arrived here from the other body, but we made it better. First, we converted it from so- called ``mandatory'' spending to ``discretionary.'' That will allow our colleagues on the Appropriations Committees an annual chance to review the program and make sure that money collected from users and money spent on the system is only enough to get the job done. Next, in working with our friends from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, we added language to help the EPA harmonize its changeover to electronic filing with the Department of Transportation. The DOT also has its own requirements for handling and reporting hazardous materials, and we want the agencies to talk to each other and their computers to speak the same language. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to send S. 710, as amended, back to the other body, where we expect it to be approved without further amendment so that the President can sign it into law. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Members support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 555, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Remember back in school when your math teacher expected you to show your work when solving a problem? It made sense. A number on a page, even if it was the correct answer, didn't suffice because your teacher wanted you to demonstrate you knew how to solve the problem. There, the outcome was a grade on a quiz or a test. But what about when we're talking about hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars? Why is it we take on blind faith the cost estimates produced by one of the most influential accounting firms in the United States, the Congressional Budget Office. In 1974, the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, was formed to give Congress independent, nonpartisan, objective analysis of legislation. In addition, the CBO is required by law to produce a cost estimate--or ``score''--for every bill coming out of committee of either Chamber of Congress. It sounds good in theory, but the problem is no one knows how CBO arrives at their numbers--and they won't tell us. They don't have to. CBO is not required to ``show their work,'' like we were required in school, when announcing economic impact results. Members of Congress rely on the CBO score. A favorable or a budget- neutral score makes a difference for a bill's success or failure. If there are savings, chances are better that the bill will get a vote on the floor. If it's budget-neutral, it may still get a vote. But what happens if the analysis was wrong and turns out to lead to big deficits, or what if Congress failed to call up a bill for a vote because CBO scored it as deficit spending when really it could lead to substantial savings? The price of an inaccurate estimate right now is extremely high. Our national debt is closing in on $16 trillion. Major safety net programs like Medicare and Medicaid are heading for bankruptcy. Congress has to act to bring our country back from the brink of a fiscal cliff. It is crucial for policymakers to have all available information about the true cost of legislation. And that's why I introduced H.R. 6136, the CBO Transparency Act, so lawmakers and the public have an opportunity to review CBO's work. Today, you can access information on hospital visits, crop yields, and air quality levels, which are used to produce major regulation by the EPA and others. But you can't find out how the CBO scored things. Like any scientific study, opening up the details of a CBO analysis for greater inspection and peer review will enable us to better understand how decisions are made. This bill isn't about pointing out inaccuracies in CBO's estimates. What we're doing here is using transparency to enhance the credibility of the Congressional Budget Office. Once the information is out there, it can be reviewed by Congress and all Americans. Is the information correct? Do they consider all the facts? Was something left out? Was their analysis done right? In 2009, a University of Chicago researcher revealed a CBO office had grossly underestimated potential savings from changes to Medicare and Medicaid. For instance, CBO overestimated the cost of Medicare part D by 40 percent. In the 1980s, CBO predicted spending on hospitals stays under new law would be $19 million more expensive than the actual cost. Congress changed Medicare to pay hospitals a fixed amount per admission. This encouraged shorter stays, led to fewer diagnostic services, and lowered administrative costs. But CBO didn't predict that, and by 1986 actual spending for hospital payments was 18 percent lower than estimated. The CBO also estimated that if hospitals reported infection rates, it would cost about $30 million over 5 years. It turns out when they report infection rates, they pay attention to it. And the savings has been billions of dollars over 5 years and tens of thousands of lives. When the CBO says the stimulus saved 3.3 million jobs or tax rates don't impact decisions by individuals or businesses or that cutting spending will slow economic growth, we currently have no way of understanding the conclusions CBO has reached because we can't get information on how they got there. Ultimately, the decisions we make in Congress are only as good as the data upon which they are based. I hope all my colleagues will join me in this effort. Transparency is a cornerstone of sound government. I urge Democrats and Republicans to sign on to this bipartisan good government bill, H.R. 6136, the CBO Transparency Act.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, last week, we received some unemployment numbers, or employment numbers, of 80,000 new jobs. It was a bleak statistic telling us that now we were in our 41st straight week where unemployment was above 8 percent. Of course, the real unemployment numbers are saying there are 23 million Americans out of work or looking for work, people who are unemployed or underemployed based upon their skill set and taking whatever job they can get. But put this 80,000 new jobs in an additional context, and it is of deeper concern. This year, 3.1 million students graduated from high school, and 1.7 million graduated with a bachelor's degree from a program. Add to that list also those who have an associate's degree or simply have dropped out of school, and we recognize those 80,000 new jobs are barely a drop in the bucket. Also note that among those who are college graduates, recently, 53 percent of them are underemployed; that is, working in a job below the qualification levels which they have achieved. About 1.5 million under age 25 in 2011 were jobless or underemployed, the highest in at least 11 years. In the year 2000, the share was at a low of 41 percent. Now, families are concerned because they don't want more unemployment checks when they can be getting an employment check. They need jobs to pay for their food and their housing, to pay off loans for their cars and schools, to save something for retirement or save something for other family needs for the future. But put this in the context of other increases families have had to face in the last few years. The increased cost for gasoline in the last 3\1/2\ to 4 years is about $2,200 per year per family. The increased cost of electricity with new coal regulations put forth by the EPA will cause families' electric bills to rise by $300 to $400 per year. The new coal regulations are estimated to lead to a loss of 180,000 jobs per year. CONSOL has announced it's laying off 318 miners. Arch Coal has laid off 750 miners in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia. Alpha notified employees at four West Virginia mines of a loss of 100 jobs. The coal regulations are such from the EPA that we have had no new coal-fired power plant permits granted for the last few years. Simply, no plants are being built, and ones are being closed down. And yet we have a massive amount of coal which we can use to create clean energy if the EPA would allow us to build some newer, cleaner plants. Look at sulfur dioxide--there has been a 56 percent decrease, and with nitrous dioxide a 38 percent decrease since the 1970s, while coal has tripled in its use. Mercury emissions have decreased by 60 percent since the 1950s, and we can do better. We also note that we can have new jobs from offshore drilling, and although the House has passed such legislation, the Senate and the White House have blocked it. If we drill for oil and natural gas, several things can happen. One, it can free up 2.5 to $3.7 trillion, which we can use to invest in infrastructure of roads, highways, bridges, locks and dams, and water and sewer projects. But as long as those areas are blocked, we cannot reap the benefits from that. Instead, we continue to spend money to protect OPEC oil fields and had a trade deficit of $127 billion last year with OPEC. And sadly, of course, there is that unmeasurable, immeasurable cost of having our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines fight overseas, fighting Taliban and al Qaeda funded with OPEC oil profits. Finally, we have the increased cost of health insurance. The Kaiser Family Foundation has estimated the cost to the average family to be about $1,200 more since we passed the health care bill here, and median income for families is down $4,300. There are solutions that the House, Senate, and White House can work on together. But much of this is in the area of using our domestic energy and to stop saying ``no'' to domestic energy. Although an all- of-the-above policy that includes wind and solar is valuable, we cannot create jobs by also saying ``no'' to coal, 10 Federal agencies trying to block natural gas drilling, and everyone dropping the ability to drill for oil. We have solutions, we have answers. We only have to have the will to pass these.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I have never doubted my friends on the other side of the aisle's compassion or sincerity, but have always believed there was a better way of handling these health care costs to make sure that we all get the health care we need and the doctor we choose at a price we can afford. Here are some ways we need to do this: Allow people to buy across State lines. A University of Minnesota study said it would drop the uninsured by 12 million; The ability to join groups, because the purchasing power of groups is what is making Medicare part D come in at 40 percent under budget; Put an emphasis on coordinated care, which decreases hospitalizations and avoidable readmissions and complications, sometimes by 20 to 40 percent; By making sure health care plans are personal, affordable and permanent, you can take the plan you need across jobs and you can't be cut for being sick; To make sure there are tax deductions for buying insurance just like employers have, to allow the chronically ill to be part of high-risk pools; To encourage people to take steps in their own life to maintain their own health, and; To have better use of prescription drugs, generic and nongeneric, which also saves a massive amount of money because some $250 billion a year is wasted in drug problems. We need this instead of $570 billion in new taxes in a $1.76 trillion bill.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, on rollcall No. 392, I was present but the voting machine did not record my vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' Stated against:

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, what good are life-saving drugs if you can't afford them? That's why real reform of the Nation's health care system begins with promoting quality and affordability. I am excited this legislation is moving forward because the FDA will finally have a system for bringing more life-saving generic drugs to market. Today's bill authorizes the first generic drug user-fee program in order to expedite the approval of generics, which are only a fraction of the cost of brand-name drugs. Generic medications can save a patient $1,000 a year on medication alone, but it may well yield billions in savings across our Nation when affordable generic drugs are used to treat acute and chronic illness. Right now, consumers are spending millions, if not billions, more in out-of-pocket costs because the FDA doesn't have the resources to tackle 2,800 generic applications awaiting review. There will be fewer strokes, heart attacks, and cases of cardiovascular disease when this bill moves forward into law, and we will be assured the medicines our families take are of the highest quality. Under this bill, regulators will no longer be able to look past China's history of tainted drugs, like the 2007 heparin scare that killed 200 people. I would like to thank Congressmen Dingell and Waxman and Chairman Upton for moving forward with this bipartisan bill. I urge its adoption.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I want to thank the chairman and Ranking Member Price for their hard work in writing a bill that keeps American families safe and prioritizes border and immigration law enforcement in a very tough budget environment. In this bill, the Federal Air Marshal Service is under particular pressure to reduce costs, and we all share the common goal of pursuing the most cost-efficient and mission-effective air marshals to protect our skies. In my district, there are over 80 dedicated and professional air marshals at the Pittsburgh International Airport, which is one of the country's 50 busiest airports. We all know about the air marshals' hard work, training, and risk to keep us safe; but I'm concerned about the potential impact on air marshals' cost and the impact upon families if the Federal Air Marshal Service moves forward with a restructuring plan. That's why I was going to offer an amendment with Congressman Altmire to ensure no decision is made impacting Pittsburgh's air marshal workforce without first conducting a cost-benefit analysis that explores all potential options. I'm concerned if the Transportation Security Administration proceeds with closing the Pittsburgh office, any potential for savings would be dwarfed by the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to relocate employees and their families. Currently, taxpayers and the TSA pay almost nothing in commuting costs because the Pittsburgh air marshal office is less than 2 miles from the Pittsburgh airport terminal. Since air marshals are doing most of their work on a plane, the office exists mostly as a place for employees to go and complete their paperwork. Forcing air marshals to travel between a new office potentially much further from the Pittsburgh airport would dramatically increase costs and travel time. What's most important for purposes of cost and security is the proximity of the air marshal workforce to the airport. I have asked the Federal Air Marshal Service to review alternatives to closure or transfer of the Pittsburgh field office, including co-locating its office on the grounds of the 911th Airlift Wing, which is an Air Reserve military base, part of the Pittsburgh International Airport. Moving to the 911th would save the Agency a significant amount of overhead and rent costs while preserving the Federal Air Marshal Service operational mission to keep the skies safe. I've been assured by the director of the Federal Air Marshal Service that he will look into alternatives to save costs, and I would like to get the assurance from the chairman that he'll work with me on securing that report.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. I thank the chairman. This year a typical senior will spend 15 percent of their household income on health care, including $620 plus on prescriptions. But that sum would be much higher if there were no FDA-approved generic pharmaceuticals. Without generics, that same senior might pay $1,000 for medicine, and Medicare would spend some $67 billion more. We must always assure that any medication, brand name or generic, is of the highest quality. But currently the Food and Drug Administration cannot assure that medicines coming in from overseas factories such as those in China are pure. This bill includes my legislation, the Generic Drug and Biosimilar User Fee Act, to authorize for the first time an FDA program that will expedite approval of generics and clear a backlog of over 2,800 generic applications. Currently, the FDA is supposed to make a decision on the application within 16 months. But the agency is taking twice that time because it lacks resources for conducting reviews and inspecting factories. U.S. factories are inspected perhaps once every 2 years, and more often if the FDA decides; foreign factories perhaps 7 to 9 years. That means millions of dosages of drugs coming in from overseas without any inspection. Recall what happened when heparin ended up killing perhaps 100 to 200 people and causing other complications for many people. Ninety percent of pharmaceutical ingredients are made in foreign factories, but we cannot remain dependent on drugs from other countries that are below U.S. standards. People of all ages deserve peace of mind, and we all want to have the highest trust for all medicines, either brand name or generic. This bill will restore and support that trust for American consumers.

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania

Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.