Randy Neugebauer

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman, and I think he makes a great point. In fact, it is a program that has not had an application, has not been promulgated. And so there is a reason why we feel like this is not necessary, and I encourage my colleagues to vote against this amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, this discussion we have been having for the last 3 or 4 days is really about what the American people said on November 2. They said that these huge deficits are unacceptable. The fact is that we're going to run a $1.6 trillion deficit this year and our debt is almost $14.1 trillion. Projections are that if we continue on this pace, that will double in the next 10 years. Mr. Chairman, the American people said this is unacceptable. And so what are the American people doing in their own lives at home? Well, they're addressing needs versus wants. And what they're saying is there are some things that they need, and then there's some things that they want. But what they understand in these tough economic times, where we have a number of our American citizens unemployed, is that a lot of people are having to prioritize how they spend. And maybe there's a fence in the backyard that needs replacing, or maybe the deck in the backyard needs new boards, but they're postponing those. And so basically this is a very simple amendment. Basically, the White House has two accounts: one for basically daily maintenance. That account has $13 million, and this amendment does not address that account. But as they do in Washington, do you know what happens if you want to get more money? You add more accounts, and you just rename them. And there is another account called renovations and upgrades. And so what we're saying is that there's $2 million worth of upgrades that the White House would like to do. It includes things like doing a plumbing survey and some things like computer system upgrades. We think that possibly those are items that can wait until our economy gets rolling again, until we quit having these record deficits. And so it is a very simple amendment, Mr. Chairman. We just think that the White House can postpone those expenses, things that they would like but not necessarily need. This will still allow the White House to mow the yard, do the painting, do the maintenance at the White House; but it says these capital expenditures of over $2 million should be postponed for another year or two until we get our deficit spending down. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Well, I would say to the gentlewoman that there is ample money for maintenance involved in the White House. As I said, in section 1519, there is $13 million available for electrical issues, for painting issues, for maintenance issues. I think what we are saying, and I would be glad to work with the gentlewoman in the conference report if she wants to be more specific, but the three projects that this administration requested actually totaled $2 million: $1.5 million for an electrical system, computer system upgrades of $255,000 and a plumbing system survey. This is a set of drawings for $250,000. I would submit to you that the American people are making some pretty tough choices and that certainly the White House is a treasure of this country; but, Mr. Chairman, so are our children and our grandchildren a treasure. And if we don't start making some tough choices here, then we are not going to have a future for our children, which should be one of our more treasured assets. I would be glad to work with the gentlewoman in a conference report. But this amendment has merits because basically it says to the President--and I think the President would agree--you know what, if other American families are not making improvements to their house right now that aren't necessarily necessary this year, I don't think the President would want his either. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I kind of resent the insinuation that my amendment is addressed to this President. It's not addressed to this President. It's addressed to this country, and by the way, I was over at the White House during the White House Christmas party. The White House looked like it was in pretty good shape, and I can attest that the plumbing was actually working as well. But what I would say, Mr. Chairman, is there's a lot of people that would want to come to this floor tonight and make excuses why we can't begin to cut spending in this country. You know what--the American people are tired of our excuses. This is a good amendment. There's been a lot of good amendments. Yes, these are difficult choices, but these are the kind of choices that we're going to have to make if we're going to ensure that our American families have a future, that we get this economy back going, that we create jobs, and we do not leave a legacy of debt for our children and our grandchildren With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the Holt amendment. In listening to the banter that we've been hearing back and forth, you would think that we were trying to eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, but, in fact, what we're trying to do is limit it. One of the things, if you look at the history of this entity, is that it's the typical answer in Washington. When we have other regulators that aren't doing their job, the solution always is let's throw more regulation, more regulators, and more money at the problem. And so what did we do with this new bureau? Well, we said--guess what?--we're going to throw $700 million at this new agency. We're going to take $500 million out of the Fed and we're going to give them the ability to come and ask for another $200 million. Now, what is going on right now is that we don't even have a Director at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, yet they are standing up a new organization. So basically what we have from this administration is another czar. I don't know how many czars that they have over there, what the latest count is. But here we are, an agency that has the authority to spend millions of dollars, yet we can't even get one of the most egregious parts of this right. And it was very clever by the other side. They realized in the last days of the 111th Congress that there was possibly going to be a change in November. They tucked this entity over into the Fed, trying to be able to limit Congress' ability to have oversight over this organization. So I want to applaud the Appropriations Committee for figuring out a way to bring some accountability to this organization. Now, what is at play right now is that this entity in August received $18.4 million. In December they received $14.37 million. And if you annualize that rate, they are going to need less than $65 million, and yet what we're saying is Republicans want to limit that to $80 million. The Holt amendment wants to increase that another $63 million. Madam Chair, what is exactly wrong and the reason we've been having these hours and hours and hours of debate is the American people spoke very clearly last November. They are tired of Big Government. They are tired of government trying to make all of their decisions. And what this new entity is going to do is it is going to hurt consumers in that it is going to drive the cost of consumer credit up for many Americans. Some of the financial services that they have been able to enjoy, this new czar will have the ability to say that those new products cannot be offered anymore. So bringing this kind of accountability into this process is a very positive thing. It was a mistake to put this entity into the Fed to begin with. It's a mistake to let this administration continue to stand up this organization without going through the appropriate constitutional requirement that this person be confirmed by the United States Senate. It's an egregious use of the Executive power. And one of the things that we hope that the President will do very quickly is nominate someone to oversee this organization. Basically, we have people that haven't been nominated or confirmed by the Senate making very big decisions, spending millions of dollars over here, standing up an entity, quite honestly, that will not, in fact, do what a lot of the folks in this building think this entity is going to do, and that's provide consumer protection. What this entity is going to do is provide more cost to consumers. With that, I urge defeat of this amendment.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, I wish I didn't have to rise today in support of this resolution because it was a sad day for America last Saturday. But let me say this: On behalf of the people of the 19th Congressional District, whom I represent, we send our heartfelt condolences to the families and the friends and the loved ones of those who were killed in this senseless attack. We also offer our prayers for Gabby and the others who are making recovery from this act as well. You know, as I read through this resolution, and as many of you like I have been watching TV, Saturday was a bad day. It was a horrible day for America. Dana and I were in the grocery store shopping when I got the notice that my friend Gabby, our colleague Gabby, had been shot, along with others. It was terrible. As we have gotten an opportunity to watch over the last few days, what we learned is that out of this horrific act, we saw some of the things that make America great. We saw people tackle the attacker. We saw people offer assistance to Gabby and others. We saw a man shield his wife from the attacker. We saw the first responders do remarkable work in getting people to the hospital in what would be record time. We saw so many of the good things about America at a time when we saw one of the bad things. You know, as I was walking over here, I was thinking about Wednesday, I guess a week ago today, coming down on the elevator with Mark and Gabby and her parents. We had a wonderful visit. I have had an opportunity to serve on the Science Committee with Gabby. I went to lunch with her. She has a little interest in space, in case you didn't know it. And how sometimes we take for granted our friends and acquaintances and life itself, and how in just a moment life can change. So today we offer this resolution to recognize some good things about our country, to wish our good friend Gabby a complete recovery and to come back here, and we offer our thoughts and prayers for our country. God bless America.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 584, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, today is December 1, just 25 days until Christmas, but the American people have Christmas on their mind right now. In fact, they sent a list of some of the things that they do and do not want on November 2 to this administration and to this body. They said we want jobs, not more taxes. They said we want jobs, not more spending and deficits. We want jobs, not more Big Government. If we want to make sure that the American people have a very merry Christmas, let's pass H.R. 4676, which I introduced, which brings taxpayers certainty and gives every American taxpayer tax relief that they both deserve and need. Let's give the American people a merry Christmas. Let's do the right thing for the American people. Let's do the right thing for the future of our children and our grandchildren. Let's get to work and quit naming post offices in this country and go to work for the American people.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Alvin G. Davis for being named to the National 4-H Hall of Fame. Alvin is one of 16 honorees from around the country selected to receive this prestigious honor in 2010. Alvin will be the first 4-H Club member from Texas to join the Hall of Fame. A Post, TX native, Alvin started in the 4-H program in 1939. In 1948, he was the top 4-H boy and National 4-H Leadership Award winner. Alvin has also served as president of the 4-H club at the local, county, district and college levels. Alvin received a bachelor's degree in animal husbandry from Texas Tech in 1952. While at the university, he was president of the Texas Tech 4-H Club and Texas Tech Rodeo Association. In 1950, he became the director of the first National Intercollegiate Rodeo Association. Alvin was also the first inductee into the Texas Tech Rodeo Hall of Fame. Along with his commitment to 4-H, Alvin has become a renowned rodeo announcer, poet, writer, and western artist. Several of his sculptures can be found in the collections of presidents, governors, and celebrities. Alvin founded the National Cowboy Symposium and Celebration and has written children's books, poetry books, and a rodeo periodical. In 2002, he was inducted into the National Cowboy Song and Poetry Hall of Fame. I am enormously appreciative to Alvin for his hard work and for his contributions to promoting cowboy culture. On behalf of the 19th Congressional District, including myself, I thank Alvin for all of his time and effort to preserve the values, honor, and respect of the American Cowboy and congratulate him on joining the National 4-H Hall of Fame.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Mr. Brad Moran for being inducted into the Tech University Mass Communications Hall of Fame. Brad received a Bachelor's Degree in Business from Texas Tech in 1982, making him the first college graduate in his family. While attending Texas Tech, Brad worked as an afternoon disk jockey. After graduation, he went to work for his father at KJTV-34 as a national sales manager. In 1985, Brad and his father decided to make their station a FOX affiliate. The father-son team also launched a Spanish- language station, Telemundo 46. Since then, Brad has launched several successful news and interactive talk radio shows under the name of Ramar Communications. Most recently, the Ramar radio group launched TT 104.3, the Texas Tech University athletics station. Not only is Brad Moran a successful broadcaster, but he is also very active in the community. He has served on, and chaired, numerous fundraising committees for Lubbock. A few of these include the Lubbock Area United Way, American Cancer Society, South Plains Area Food Bank, and Lubbock Rotary Club. Brad continues to support Texas Tech from academics to athletics. He is a member of the Chief Executives Roundtable for the Rawls College of Business and has committed to begin a scholarship endowment for the Texas Tech College of Mass Communications. Additionally, Brad has served on numerous committees of the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce, and he is currently serving on the Chamber's Board of Directors. A few noted accolades and awards Brad has received include the 1999 LAF Silver Medalist; 2003 Alexis de Tocqueville Society Award for his community dedication through philanthropic and human service; and the Lubbock Chamber's 2006 Businessperson of the Year Award. I am enormously appreciative to Mr. Brad Moran for his contributions to Texas Tech and the Lubbock community. Those in District 19, including myself, congratulate him on being named to the Hall of Fame and extend to him our best wishes for his future endeavors.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the author of H. Res. 1485, to express support for the designation of September as Prostate Cancer Awareness Month by the House of Representatives. I didn't know much about prostate cancer, other than occasionally one of my friends would turn up with that diagnosis; and about every year when I went to my health care provider, I went through the normal process of having a digital exam and also taking my PSA, and was pretty religious about doing that, always with the good news of a negative result. Well, that all changed in August of last year when I went for my test and it was decided that additional testing needed to be done. So tests were done, and it was determined that I did in fact have prostate cancer. Once you get cancer, then you get a lot more interested in that subject, and I wanted to share with the folks this evening a little bit about this prostate cancer. Just in 2010 alone, 217,730 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 32,000 men in the United States will die from prostate cancer. Thirty percent of the new diagnoses of prostate cancer will occur in men under the age of 65. Prostate cancer takes one life every 18 minutes. In the next 24 hours, prostate cancer will claim the lives of 83 American men. If a close relative has prostate cancer, a man's risk of the disease more than doubles. With two relatives, his risk increases five times. With three close relatives, the risk is about 97 percent. African American males suffer prostate cancer at a rate of 65 percent higher than white males and double the prostate cancer mortality rates of their white counterparts. Obesity is a significant predictor of the severity of prostate cancer and the probability that the disease will lead to death. In fact, high cholesterol levels are strongly associated with advanced prostate cancer. If a man in the United States has one family member diagnosed with prostate cancer, he has a 1 in 3 chance of being diagnosed with prostate cancer. What we have learned is that this is a deadly disease, and it affects men. The good news is that once I learned some of those facts, obviously that got my attention. But the good news is that almost 100 percent of the men diagnosed with prostate cancer will stay alive for at least 5 years; about 90 percent of the prostate cancer cases are found while the cancer is still either local or regional, and nearly 100 percent of these men will be alive 5 years after being diagnosed. So what is the importance of National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month? Well, it is important to recognize that this is a real hazard for men. But, most importantly, and the good news is, if caught early and treated early, the survival chances are extremely good. So that is the reason that I decided to bring this resolution before this House and to help bring awareness to the American people, and particularly men, is that it is important to make sure you get screened and to make that a part of your annual physical. And, if you are unfortunate enough to be diagnosed with prostate cancer, that the earlier you detect it, the better your chances of survival and eventual cure are. So I am about to celebrate the day after tomorrow, on September 30, of being 1 year cancer free. The reason I am able to do that and the reason I am able to stand before this body tonight is because we have got important research going on on how to treat this cancer. There is important research going on on hopefully some day being able to prevent prostate cancer. But until then, it is important that men get screened and get their tests done so that they too can stand and say, You know what? I survived prostate cancer. Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this bill and urge all men get tested.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. It is my honor and privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, the ranking member of the Financial Institutions Subcommittee, Mr. Hensarling.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining on both sides?

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just last month, in the month of August, I traveled around the 19th Congressional District. I had nine town hall meetings. But more importantly, I had numerous meetings with small businesses and with larger businesses in my district and with banks, both large and small, about this issue of getting America back to work and getting small businesses back to creating jobs again, and one of the things I heard over and over again was the word ``uncertainty.'' They said, Congressman, there is too much uncertainty about what the future looks like in this country. I heard small businesses say, We don't know what this new health care plan is going to mean or cost to our business. Congressman, we don't know what the tax environment is going to be in this country because Congress hasn't done anything to keep the largest tax increase in the history of our country from unfolding. Congressman, we don't know how to deal with all these new regulations that are coming out of all of these agencies where EPA is trying to circumvent Congress and regulate greenhouses. And, Congressman, we don't know what to think about a country that keeps spending and borrowing and spending and borrowing to the point where now every day every dollar we spend we borrow 42 cents. So I heard that from the businesses. And what I heard them say is, We are holding on to the employees we've got. We've tried not to lay off anybody. And we could probably buy some new machinery, or we could probably put some more people on, but there's too much uncertainty. We are just going to sit on the sidelines. Also I heard, when we had the debate on this bill previously, the other side talking about the lack of credit availability to a lot of small businesses, and so I went to see my friends in the banking business. And I went to say to them, Why aren't you lending money? And they said, Congressman, we've got lots of money to loan. Our bank has the strongest capital it's had in a long time. We have money to lend. They said, The good customers that we would like to lend money to don't want to borrow money because of the uncertainty that's going on in this country right now. I said, Well, let me make sure I understand this. You're saying you have the money to loan, but people don't want to borrow it because they are concerned about the future of this country and what the environment, business environment is going to be? And they said, That is exactly right. And so what is so interesting about this is this is another one of the majority's failed attempts to recycle a program that didn't create any jobs the first round. TARP I, TARP II, all of the stimulus, all of these massive amounts of future generations' economic opportunity thrown at this economy and no jobs have been created. In fact, we have almost got 15 million people in this country that are unemployed today. And since we've done all these programs, we've lost almost 2\1/2\ million jobs. What the small businesses need in this country is certainty and not another bailout program. This bill raises taxes. It gives some temporary tax relief, as my friend from Texas said, but it also--and I don't know what part of the fact that the small businesses are concerned about this 1099 thing, now we've got the 1099 in the health care bill. Now we've got the 1099 on rental expenses in this bill making it more onerous, creating more uncertainty, more lessening the opportunity and the motivation for small businesses to expand and to create jobs in this country. In fact, yesterday Secretary Geithner appeared in one of our committees. He said banks have plenty of money to lend. That's Secretary Geithner. We had the Independent Community Bankers say that banks have plenty of liquidity, plenty of money to lend. It's a matter of getting quality demand back. Another comment was from our folks at NFIB. They said that the primary problem facing small business owners right now in terms of job creation is not access to credit. This is the group of people that represents small businesses in this country. It is a lack of sales, customers, and confidence. Small business owners are unlikely to invest in hiring or expanding their businesses when their sales and profits remain weak. If the majority is serious, and we are wondering if they are serious, about getting America back working, getting America back to the vibrant economy that it had, let's do something serious about that and not put the American taxpayers--we are going to go borrow $30 billion for this. And we are going to have to borrow the whole $30 billion because somewhere in the middle of last month, everything the Treasury spends from that point going forward is borrowed money. We are headed to a $1.3 trillion deficit this year. So we are going to go borrow $30 billion to put into a program that the banking industry and NFIB and all of these people say really isn't what the economy needs. What the economy needs is certainty: certainty in taxes, certainty in regulatory environment, and certainty that this Congress is going to quit borrowing and spending money that it doesn't have. So I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill. Let's vote for something that really matters and really gets America back to work. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, I was detained from votes due to a meeting on July 28, 2010. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: rollcall 477, ``nay'' rollcall 478; ``yea'' rollcall 479, ``yea.''

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, on that I request a recorded vote.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, earlier this week the House voted 393- 24 to pass legislation that would cancel hundreds of millions of dollars in old earmarks that have been sitting unused, sometimes some of those for over 20 years. The Surface Transportation Earmark Rescission, Savings, and Accountability Act rescinded $713 million of Federal highway contract authority for 309 Member-designated projects for the Surface Transportation Authorization Acts of 1987, 1991, 1998 and 2005. After passage of this legislation, Members of Congress should be applauded for supporting these commonsense spending cuts. We said long- term economic growth and recovery can't happen unless we cut wasteful government spending and tackle our exploding deficit. We agreed that these earmarks were a wasteful use of the taxpayers' money. The number of unused earmarks in these old transportation bills shows that Congress needs a better process of deciding how to spend the taxpayers' money. While many on the other side want to continue their practice of earmarking on their constituents' behalf, I cannot support this reckless spending. The bill before us today includes over 500 new earmarks that we cannot simply afford. More importantly, these earmarks are potentially causing even more government inefficiency. While I supported the bill on Tuesday, we also need to be honest that it did not actually reduce any spending. These projects have been on hold for a long time, and this money was never going to be used and never was allocated. I agree that Congress should repeal spending that is not going to be used, but we didn't reduce the deficit $700 million by taking out these old earmarks, even though we talked like that's what we were actually doing. Today, we get to vote on an amendment that actually cuts unspent funds. My amendment says that we should take the unspent money from the stimulus package and return it to the taxpayers. Most of us agreed that we should take unspent money out of the old transportation earmarks in the vote earlier this week. Most of us should agree then that with this bill we should take and give back to the American taxpayer the stimulus money that has not been spent. My amendment would reduce the FY 2011 spending bill by the same amount that's yet to be committed from the $61.7 billion included in the 2009 economic stimulus bill for transportation and housing programs. According to the Appropriations Committee report, $10.52 billion went to programs that have not been committed to yet, and much less, the money has not been spent or is not out the door. If Americans go to recovery.gov and review the agency reports for the Department of Transportation or Housing and Urban Development, they will learn that we're once again double-dipping on the backs of their children and their grandchildren. Here are just a few examples of programs receiving more money in today's spending bill that has money left from the 2009 stimulus bill. One of those is the bill that is before us today, $2 billion for capital investment grants. While these grants may provide worthy investments in the infrastructure, there is still $800 million left from the stimulus that has not been spent. Today's bill includes $3.5 billion in grants for airports. However, there's more than $1 billion left from the stimulus bill. Grants to the Amtrak system that were slated to receive $563 million already has almost $1.3 billion ready to go out the door as we so often hear but actually not spent. Moving on to housing, we still have $2.2 billion in the Home Investment Partnership Program to spend from the stimulus, but today, we're poised to add another $1.8 billion on top of the 2.2 that hasn't been spent. Mr. Chairman, as we learned on Tuesday, we can raise up, rise above the partisan differences and put a stop to these projects that aren't working, won't be funded and aren't completed and ready to be taken off the books. Today we have an opportunity once again this time to vote to actually reduce spending and the deficit. I recall the proponents arguing about this stimulus bill and how it's going to create new jobs for the American people. We were going to spend nearly a trillion dollars. We were going to create all these jobs. Unfortunately, unemployment was not going to go above 8 percent. Today 9.5 percent of the American people are out of work. We have lost 2.7 million jobs since this stimulus bill has passed. Mr. Chairman, let's give the American people a break here. Let's give them their money back. This is money we don't have. We don't have a lot of money that's in this bill. For every dollar we are going to spend we are going to borrow 43 cents. We are going to charge it to our children and our grandchildren. Quite honestly, it is not sustainable. Our national debt is $13 trillion today. We are headed to $20 trillion. We are headed to having debt almost equal to 90 percent of our total economy. Mr. Chairman, let's give the American people a break. Let's give them their $10 billion back. A lot of people say, well, it's just $10 billion; but that's the problem around here. People don't take money seriously because it's not real money to them because we are charging it to our children and our grandchildren. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you. In the particular category you are talking about, $116 million is still available. You only spent $6.9 million, yet you are asking for $1.4 billion. We were told that this money was going to go out the door real quickly to create jobs for the American people, yet we have a lot of these categories that still have a substantial amount of money. We are plussing up with new money when we haven't even spent the money we had before. And I think this sense of urgency must have gone away because these projects, the money has not been spent.