Mike Pence

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting in the city and on the farm. Our economy continues to struggle. Unless Congress acts before the end of this year, every American will see a tax increase--every single one. That's why I rise in disbelief with the news that this Congress is poised to adjourn for the fall's elections without even taking a vote on extending current tax relief. Let me say that again. I know there are proposals on the majority side about trying to extend the tax relief for some and not others, but what we are hearing is they intend to adjourn before Election Day without ever voting to make sure that no American sees a tax increase in January of next year. Mr. Speaker, higher taxes won't get anybody hired. Raising taxes on job creators won't create jobs. Let's have the debate. There's a growing bipartisan majority in this House that is prepared to extend all tax relief for every American in this, the worst economy in 25 years. And so I say, no extension of tax relief, no adjournment. Congress must not adjourn until we take an up-or-down vote on extending all tax relief for every American.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise with a heavy heart to honor the sacrifice and courage of a young Hoosier who lost his life while supporting Operation New Dawn in Iraq. Staff Sergeant Phillip Jenkins was providing security for a visiting commander when he was mortally wounded by hostile fire. Despite the dangerous nature of military service, Staff Sergeant Jenkins always knew he wanted to join the Army. Like so many before him, Staff Sergeant Jenkins bravely answered the call of duty. We will long remember the passion and dedication he had for his country, and the joy he had for life. Staff Sergeant Jenkins is a true American hero, but the tragedy of such a loss as this is never easy. I give my most sincere condolences to Staff Sergeant Jenkins' wife, Melissa, and two young daughters, Lindly and Piper; mother, Rose Jenkins; sister Cassie Jenkins; mother- in-law Debby Feurer; father-in-law Mike Hays; two brothers-in-law Matt Hays and Nick Hays; and paternal grandmother Darlene Carlile. The Good Book tells us that ``The Lord is close to the brokenhearted,'' and that is my prayer for the family of Staff Sergeant Phillip Jenkins.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. I thank the ranking member for yielding. The American people are hurting. In the city and on the farm, families are struggling in the midst of the worst recession in 25 years. Coming home to me especially today, Madam Speaker, because at this very hour more than a thousand Hoosiers are gathered at a job fair in my district. Some 65 companies have come together with a few cherished openings. My duty is here. But to be honest with you, I would rather be there, standing with those courageous Hoosiers who have come out, put on their Sunday best, and are reaching for a better future. Congress ought to be taking action; but not this, not more of the same. Here we go again. Another jobs bill, another bailout. Washington, DC now after a year and a half of failed economic policies, a stimulus and borrowing and spending and bailouts and takeovers, says we need to do another jobs bill, so let's do another bailout: $26 billion to States, putting off the hard decisions that States ought to be making, and paying for it with more than $9 billion in tax increases. You know, the American people are fed up with more taxes, more bailouts, more wasteful stimulus; yet here we go again. More spending, more bailouts and more taxes won't mean more jobs. Millions of Americans are asking: Where will it all end? When will this Congress start to come together to make the hard choices to put our fiscal house in order and to preserve and promote the kind of tax policies that will release the trapped, inherent power of the American economy. It is my hope and my prayer for those families gathered in Muncie at my job fair today that we will not have to wait until after November. But if we do, then we will. And the American people will remember November.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Russell Vought, currently the policy director for the House Republican Conference, who will leave the House after more than twelve years of service. Losing such a committed conservative and long-serving congressional staff member is a bittersweet moment for many House Republican Members, staff, and the conservative cause here on Capitol Hill. It is written in the Good Book, ``Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.'' Russell Vought embodies these words. A native of Trumbull, Connecticut, Russell Thurlow Vought is the youngest of seven children and a die-hard Yankees fan. The son of an electrician and a schoolteacher, he graduated from Wheaton College in Illinois in 1998 with a bachelor's degree in history and political science. He came to Capitol Hill soon thereafter. Mr. Vought began his career in public policy in the United States Senate. He first worked under retiring Senator Dan Coats of Indiana and soon moved to the staff of Senator Phil Gramm of Texas. During that time, he completed a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree at George Washington University Law School. Mr. Vought later joined the staff of Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, where he was instrumental in helping craft the Family Budget Protection Act, a comprehensive piece of legislation to reform the federal budget process and limit government spending. I became acquainted with Mr. Vought when I was privileged to serve as the chairman of the Republican Study Committee during the 109th Congress. He was the policy director and later served as the executive director of that conservative caucus. After being elected Republican Conference Chairman last year, I asked Mr. Vought to join the Conference staff at the start of the 111th Congress. As Policy Director, he has superbly led the Conference policy team, which serves as the main hub of legislative information for Republican Members and their staff. His expertise in areas such as the federal budget, appropriations, entitlements and legislative procedure have been invaluable in promoting conservative solutions to the issues that face our nation. As Members of Congress, we are constantly reminded of the important role played by reliable, like-minded staff members like Russell Vought. While we are sorry to lose one of the strongest advocates for the principles that guide us, Mr. Vought's infectious passion for the principles of life, liberty and limited government will long outlive his tenure here on Capitol Hill. On behalf of the House Republican Conference, I wish him continued success as he begins a new chapter in his professional life.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Thomas Jefferson said, ``When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.'' Make no mistake about it, there is fear in the air. Now elitists in Washington, DC, would have us believe that the rising voice of the American people is based on fear, but it is becoming evident that the real fear is coming from Democratic elitists here in Washington who realize that the people will not be silenced. Yesterday we learned of a new effort by Democrats in Washington to attack American citizens who speak their mind and peaceably assemble as ``extremists'' or ``radicals.'' Demeaning Tea Party citizens or other Americans for simply saying no to runaway spending, takeovers, and bailouts is beneath the dignity of a great political party and it smacks of desperation. The voices of the American people--whether the left or the right or the middle--should never be muted or demeaned by the leaders who serve them. And when we see baseless smears of good Americans whose only offense is the exercise of their First Amendment rights of free speech and free assembly, we should see the fear for what it is--the fear of losing an election.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. And this fall they will have the opportunity to elect a majority that will do just that. Announcement by the Chair

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Well, it's truly remarkable to come to the floor on what may be the second to last day of a long summer session and only be considering the second out of the 12 appropriations bills that Congress historically has spent the entire summer considering. As the distinguished ranking member of the committee said moments ago, this is only the second. We did the first of 12 yesterday. And as we come to the floor today to speak about the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, Mr. Chairman, I can't even tell you that this bill is over the budget because not only have we spent the entire summer not appropriating the Federal budget, as Congress is obligated to do, but the Democrat majority didn't even pass a budget. Didn't even try to pass a budget. I mean it really is extraordinary. You can't say this bill exceeds the budget because the majority didn't even pass a budget. Now, I heard the distinguished chairman of the full committee, who has my respect, the gentleman from Wisconsin, refer to this bill as fiscally responsible. I respect the gentleman. I believe, maybe grading on the curve that he is grading on, maybe it is. But the American people deserve to know the truth about this bill. It is a fact this bill does spend less than--1 percent less than last year's bill. But what they're kind of leaving out of the fine print is last year's bill was a 23 percent increase from the previous year. That didn't even include the $62 billion in related funding that was included in the so- called stimulus bill that's only stimulated more deficits and more debt. I mean it really is incredible. And this bill, as has been mentioned by other colleagues in this debate, this bill is an earmark factory, with 459 earmarks in this bill, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of which are related to Republican Members of Congress. In fact, the House Republicans made a decision to refrain from submitting earmarks altogether because we believe the American people are tired of borrowing and spending as usual in Washington, D.C. They're tired of an earmarking culture and a favor factory here in Washington, D.C. The truth is, as I look at this extraordinary piece of legislation and I think of a $1.47 trillion deficit this year, this massive spending bill just seems to be emblematic of the fact that this majority just doesn't get it. They don't understand that the American people are bone weary of deficits and debt and spending as usual. And they long for leadership in Washington, D.C., that's willing to play it straight, make the hard choices.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during rollcall vote 434. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, 18 months into this administration, one thing is clear: the economic policies of this administration and this liberal Democratic Congress have failed. Nearly 15 million Americans are unemployed. Unemployment hovers near a heart-breaking 10 percent; and after months of runaway spending, bailouts and takeovers, Washington Democrats are now poised to add tax increases to their agenda. The American people are starting to realize that unless this Congress acts, every single income tax bracket will increase on January 1, 2011, every single one. This weekend Treasury Secretary Geithner actually said ``The country can withstand that. I think it's good policy.'' Really? Fifteen million Americans unemployed and this administration defines good policy as what the country can withstand? The country cannot withstand more spending, more borrowing, more bailouts, or more taxes; and House Republicans will fight this tax increase with everything we have got.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during rollcall votes 465-466. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall Nos. 465 and 466.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor an extraordinary servant leader and fellow Hoosier. My relationship with Reverend Arthur Schwenk dates back to my school boy days when I was a student in his German class, and I recognize his extraordinary achievements and work on behalf of German-American relations. Reverend Schwenk earned his Bachelor of Arts Education and Master of Arts degrees in German and psychology from Ball State University, and went on to teach in the public school system for 34 years. In 2005 he graduated from Concordia Theological Seminary with a Masters degree in theology and was ordained in 2006. Throughout his career, Reverend Schwenk was an active and engaged community leader, as well as citizen ambassador. Never one to sit on the sidelines, he was instrumental in creating a partnership between my hometown of Columbus, Indiana, and Lane, Germany, and he also helped Indiana counties learn about many facets of German culture. For over thirty five years, Reverend Schwenk organized and led both adult and student tour groups to Germany to learn from and engage in German culture. Clearly, Reverend Schwenk is passionate about, and dedicated to, helping fellow Hoosiers and Americans better understand and appreciate German-American relations. It is most fitting that he is being awarded the ``Federal Republic of Germany Friendship Award,'' one of the highest awards bestowed upon an individual by the German government. This prestigious award honors Reverend Schwenk's desire to create mutual understanding and appreciation of his native Germany here in America. On behalf of hundreds of students, myself included, I thank Reverend Schwenk for his sacrifice in educating and encouraging continued understanding and respect for German-American relations.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to mourn the loss of a dear friend to the community of Sellersburg, Indiana. Lynette Elizabeth Hoffman-Miller was a devoted wife, loving mother, and courageous warrior in her battle against leukemia. Though the pain of her passing is deeply felt, we will continue to be inspired by the life she led. Lynette was born on March 20, 1972 in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to Bill and Elizabeth Hoffman. A graduate of Mayfield High School in Las Cruces, Lynette went on to receive her bachelor's degree from New Mexico State University. Lynette later moved to Sellersburg, Indiana, where she would become an active leader and vital asset to the Hoosier state. She served as the first Vice President of the Indiana Federation of Republican Women, where she excelled in her mission to support Republican principles and promote community service. A longtime advocate of healthy living, Lynette spent many hours promoting nutrition, exercise, and complementary medicine on her blog. She was very fond of time spent with her mother and sister attending wellness conventions. Her strong faith helped her and her family through her difficult battle against leukemia. Lynette served on the board of directors of St. Joe on the Hill Catholic Church in Sellersburg. She also taught Sunday school and relished time spent with her family and friends. One of Lynette's favorite hobbies was to create unique and thoughtful greeting cards and stamps for her friends and loved ones. She was an avid fan of singer Toby Keith and loved the color green. We have lost an important figure in the Sellersburg community, but I know that Lynette's legacy will not soon be forgotten. Let us keep her cherished family and friends in our prayers during this difficult time, especially her husband Chuck Miller, daughter Cambrelyn, parents Bill and Elizabeth Hoffman, sister Trinette (Jason) Dixon, paternal grandmother Ann Hoffman, and father and mother-in-law Dr. Robert and Lois Miller. May they find comfort in the Old Book, which tells us that ``Because of the Lord's great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning.''

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I submit the following letter. Dear Chairman Levin and Ranking Member Camp: I write to express my serious concerns about H.R. 4976, the ``Internet Gambling Regulation and Tax Enforcement Act of 2010,'' and the legislation it implements, H.R. 2267, the ``Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act.'' The ``optimum'' revenue effects of these bills can be achieved only by massive and unprecedented expansion of gambling and by preempting the powers of the States to regulate gambling within their borders. Gambling regulation has traditionally been conducted by the States and Indian tribes. H.R. 2267, the substantive proposal that underlies the revenue provisions of H.R. 4976, creates an Internet gambling licensing system that vests regulatory authority in the United States Treasury Department. While H.R. 2267 allows the Treasury to partner with States to carry out regulatory and enforcement activities, the bill also provides all Federal licensees with a ``complete defense against any prosecution or enforcement action under any Federal or State law.'' This ``safe harbor'' provision effectively nullifies existing State laws by placing all Federal license-holders outside the scope of the States' own gambling enforcement powers. H.R. 2267 also preempts current Federal laws that are vital to State gambling and regulatory frameworks. State laws are reinforced by Federal statutes that either rely on substantive State provisions or prevent interstate incursions on State-level public policies. The Federal Wire Act of 1961, for instance, supplements State gambling controls by barring interstate wagers. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 is structured, in part, around State gambling laws. By exempting licensees from laws such as the Wire Act or UIGEA, H.R. 2267 severely impairs this long-standing, complimentary relationship between Federal and State regulatory systems. Importantly, the revenue-generating power of H.R. 4967 depends almost entirely on the Federal preemption made possible by H.R. 2267. H.R. 2267 does provide a restrictive opt-out mechanism through which the States may decline to participate in the Federal licensing system. However, the Joint Committee on Taxation's most expansive of four different estimates--$42 billion--is based on discarding even these State opt-out rights in favor of complete Federal preemption. In that estimate, the Joint Committee explicitly assumed that ``no State or tribal government will be permitted to limit federally licensed Internet gambling operators from providing online gambling services in their jurisdictions.'' In other words, H.R. 4976 will generate $42 billion only if H.R. 2267's opt-out procedure--its principal State-protective provison--is eviscerated. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that is most clearly based on the texts of H.R. 2267 and H.R. 4976 indicates that the bills will generate approximately $10 billion in Federal revenue. This much more modest estimate appears to assume that many States will choose to opt-out in order to prevent the expansion of gambling on the Internet. While we realize that H.R. 4976 provides license fee revenue and grants to the States, these incentives do not assuage my concerns. Thank you for considering my view. Sincerely, Gregory F. Zoeller, Indiana Attorney General.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. This is a difficult time in the life of our Nation. The American people are focused on jobs. But given the recent political rhetoric from the White House and what we just heard about letting tax cuts expire, one thing is clear: Democrats in Washington still don't get it. It's amazing. In the midst of the worst economy in 25 years, Democrats are actually talking about embracing the largest tax increase in American history. You know, I don't know anybody back in Indiana who thinks they pay too little in taxes. The American people deserve to know that should Democrats get their way, every income tax bracket will increase on January 1, 2011. Every single one. You know, you don't raise taxes on every American taxpayer during the worst recession in 25 years. Here's our commitment: As we did on their government takeover of health care, their national energy tax, and their failed stimulus policy, Republicans are going to stand in the gap against their job-killing agenda. We will protect taxpayers from the largest tax increase in American history with everything we've got. The American people know Washington doesn't tax too little; Washington spends too much. And Republicans are on the side of the American people.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, in the worst economy in a quarter of a century, American families are hurting. Businesses are struggling in the city and on the farm. And that's obvious to almost everyone in this country, except the Obama administration. Remarkably, yesterday the White House issued a report saying that the stimulus bill passed a year and a half ago had ``saved or created 2.5 to 3.6 million jobs.'' As my three teenagers might say to me in like circumstances: Really, 2.5 to 3.6 million jobs? Unemployment was 7.5 percent when the stimulus was passed. It's 9.5 percent today. It's important the American people know that the report issued by the administration yesterday isn't even based on actual numbers. It comes from what economists within the administration say is a highly inflated projection of how much economic growth is created for every government dollar that's spent. The facts come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. They speak for themselves. Since the stimulus was enacted, more than 3 million jobs have been lost in this country, a net job loss of 2.4 million jobs. Enough with the talk. The stimulus bill has failed. It's time for new ideas, across-the-board tax relief, and fiscal discipline now.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. The reality is that we have got to bring new ideas to bear on this economy. The American people know what's necessary to get this economy moving again. It's fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C., and it's fast-acting, across the board tax relief for working families, small businesses, and family farms. What we hear from corporations across this country is that there is over $2 trillion in idled capital. We need to release the inherent power in this economy. We need to restore the confidence of capital markets in our commitment to fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C. And we can do all of that today and meet the needs of families struggling with unemployment. By passing a fiscally responsible extension of unemployment insurance, we would send a message that we get it. We know people are hurting, we know the policies aren't working, but we want to practice fiscal responsibility. And for heaven's sakes, let's stop saying the stimulus worked. Let's try some new ideas. Let's come together across this aisle and do what's necessary to get America working again.

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and to the underlying bill, but it pains me to do so. As the Record will reflect, I, and most of my colleagues in this body, have supported repeated extensions of unemployment benefits. And as I told my constituents yesterday, I was anxious to do so again. American families are hurting. This economy is struggling in the aftermath of the worst recession in a quarter of a century. And as my colleague just suggested, this economy is also struggling in the midst of the failed economic policies of this administration and this Congress. Millions of American families are struggling to make ends meet. Since the passage of the so-called stimulus bill, 2.6 million jobs have been lost, and unemployment hovers near 10 percent. So I was anxious to be able to come to this floor before heading home for the Independence Day break, having supported an extension of unemployment benefits. But I rise in opposition because I think what the American people expect us to do is what they've been doing at kitchen tables and sitting around desks and small businesses and on family farms, and that is making the hard choices. We can provide an extension of unemployment insurance benefits in this Congress, and we can make the decisions to pay for it. And I'm sure it is a mystery to millions of Americans that will be looking on as to why we didn't even try. This Democrat majority, after adopting so-called PAYGO rules, after hearing from so-called fiscal conservative Members of the Democrat majority early in this Congress about how we were going to pay for what we spent, has waived their own PAYGO rules to add $34 billion to the national debt. And I just have to think millions of Americans are asking why. There are any number of actions that we could take, decisions we could make, reordering our priorities to provide for the families at the point of the need here. The gentleman from Ohio just said that many of us in the minority were saying that we can't afford to extend unemployment benefits. We can afford it. But at my kitchen table when we say we can afford something, it means we can afford to pay for it. Not just simply--when my wife comes to me and says, I want to make a major expenditure, I say can we afford it? That means can we pay for it. Here it just means getting out the credit card of our children and grandchildren and running up the national debt by $34 billion. I also rise with a heavy heart in opposition to this bill because we are here extending unemployment benefits again because the economic policies of this administration and this Congress have failed. Would that the economic policies of the so-called stimulus had worked. The President said we needed to borrow about a trillion dollars from future generations of Americans a year-and-a-half ago or unemployment, he said, that was then 7.6 percent, would go over 8 percent. Now it's 10 percent on average around the country, and higher, as has been said, in many jurisdictions. Remarkably, yesterday the President of the United States goes to Racine, Wisconsin, a place that has a 14 percent unemployment rate, and he made these comments. He said, Things just aren't as bad as they could have been. There could have been a catastrophe. And in that sense, the stimulus worked. The President of the United States yesterday in Racine, Wisconsin, said the stimulus worked. And then remarkably he went on to suggest that the Republican leader in Congress was out of touch. It's mind-boggling that at a time when so many--I mean what would this administration and this majority say to a father who's been struggling to make ends meet, who has been borrowing money from family members to pay the mortgage because he can't find work? What would he say to the word of the President of the United States that ``the stimulus worked''? What would the single mother say who has been out of work persistently, who has applied for dozens and dozens of jobs, and has gone deeper and deeper in debt during these difficult times? What would she say to word that the stimulus worked?

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, nearly sixty years ago, Ensign Robert W. Langwell gave his life in service to our great Nation. Shortly after hostilities began in the Korean War, Ensign Langwell was lost at sea when his Navy minesweeper was sunk off the coast of South Korea. On behalf of a grateful Nation, I wish to thank members of the Korean government and U.S. military who were instrumental in recovering the body of Ensign Langwell. After decades of fruitless searching, he will finally receive the burial he deserves when he is laid to rest with full military honors in Arlington National Cemetery on July 12, 2010. Ensign Langwell was a native of my hometown--Columbus, Indiana--who served in both World War II and the Korean War. He later moved to Indianapolis where he graduated from high school, and then served two years in the Navy during World War II, including time at Pearl Harbor. Upon his return, Ensign Langwell attended Indiana University where he graduated with a degree in marketing. He was later called to serve in the Korean War before passing away in October 1950 at the age of 26. I offer my sincere condolences to David Parker, first cousin; Jerry Redford, Phyllis Johnson, and Brenda Showalter, all second cousins; Mary Parker, aunt; Jim Parker, first cousin; Nancy Cook, first cousin; John Parker, first cousin; and Karen Sprauer, second cousin. While Ensign Langwell's young life was tragically cut short, his valiant sacrifice is not forgotten.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment and also to the underlying bill. I have great respect for the gentlelady who brings this amendment. She said earlier that there is, in her way of thinking, no military solution in Afghanistan. But let me say that surrender is a military tactic. I just oppose it. This is a very serious time in the life of our country here at home; and it's easy, I suspect, for some Americans to forget that we're a Nation at war. But we are. As I was reminded when I traveled to Afghanistan the day after Christmas this last year, at this very hour, we have men and women in uniform in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. And we owe them, in this moment, the resources they need to complete their mission, get the job done, and come home safe. We also owe them the respect of doing that without using our soldiers as a vehicle for other domestic spending priorities. Military spending bills should be about military spending, and nothing else. And this legislation fails that test. Before us today is a $75 billion spending bill, but less than half of this legislation will be used to support the Defense Department's war operations. Less than half. The military funding measure will spend almost $5 billion, supposedly, on a temporary bailout for a Federal Pell Grant program. This so-called military funding measure will spend $50 million on the Port of Guam, and $18 million for emergency reforestation, and $15 million for a highway safety study. This military funding measure will also even spend, as we've heard in earlier debate, $10 billion on teacher jobs. Now, I've been married, as of a month ago, for 25 years to a teacher. I support teachers. I believe education is a State and local function. Anybody else remember that we just spent $53 billion in supposedly one-time spending for education in the President's failed stimulus bill? And now, on the backs of our soldiers, comes another $10 billion that has to be appropriated to save teachers jobs? We can do better, men and women. To top it all off, $63 billion of this bill isn't even paid for, just more deficits and more debt. One of the ways the Democrats are saving a little bit of money here is by $3 billion in cuts to the Defense Department. We can do better. Our soldiers deserve better. Let's reject this legislation. Let's do right by our soldiers. Military spending bills should be about military spending, and nothing else.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, Federal spending is out of control, and the American people know it. $13 trillion national debt, a $1.4 trillion deficit this year, an 84 percent increase in nondefense discretionary spending since this administration took office. The Democrat majority's answer so far this year, no budget. To answer this extraordinary fiscal crisis by refusing to lead is unacceptable. After a year of avoiding hard choices, now we hear the latest Democrat plan is actually to bring a budget resolution to the floor in some procedural motion known as ``deeming.'' Well, Mr. Speaker, you can't deem a budget that you never passed. The American people long for leadership in Washington, D.C., that's willing to sit down across party lines and face the fiscal and economic crisis of this country head on with hard choices. We can't get this economy moving again until we get Washington, D.C., under control. I urge my colleagues, reject this phony baloney deeming of the budget. Let's sit down. Let's face our fiscal crisis head on. Give the American people the kind of leadership they want and deserve.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the conference report for H.R. 4173, the so-called ``Restoring American Financial Stability Act.'' We're used to creative titles around here, but I've got to tell you, during a time of extraordinary economic duress, millions of Americans unemployed, failed economic policies, it is darkly ironic that a bill that will do anything but restore financial stability is named for that purpose. The truth of the matter is, when you look at this legislation, it's proof positive again that this majority just doesn't get it. The American people are not looking at Washington, D.C., and clamoring for more spending, more taxes, and more bailouts. They're looking at Washington, D.C., and saying, When are you going to focus on creating jobs? When are you going to set partisan differences aside, power grabs, and Big Government agendas aside to do something to put Americans back to work? Under the guise of financial reform, Democrats today are pushing yet another bill that will kill jobs, raise taxes, and make bailouts permanent. Let me say that again. This legislation will kill jobs by restricting access to credit, it will kill jobs by raising taxes on those that would provide loans and opportunity to small business owners and family farmers, and it makes the bad ideas of the Wall Street bailout permanent. Free market economics depends on the careful application of a set of ideals--traditional American ideals and principles. Chief among them is the notion that the freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail. Personal responsibility is at the very center of the American experiment from an economic standpoint. It is that center from which we have become not only the freest, but the most prosperous Nation in the history of the world. As my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know, I vigorously opposed the Wall Street bailout because I thought it departed from that fundamental principle of personal responsibility and limited government. And I rise today to vigorously oppose this legislation that takes the bad ideas of the Wall Street bailout and makes them permanent. This legislation codifies the notion of too big to fail, a policy and an approach the American people have roundly rejected. It will give government bureaucrats more power to pick winners and losers. When a financial firm is failing, the Treasury Secretary and the FDIC will actually have the authority to take taxpayer dollars and decide which creditors to pay back and how and when they'll get paid. The American people don't want Washington, D.C., in that business. They want a refereed private sector that says ``yes'' to traditional bankruptcy and ``no'' to bailouts, because we're here to protect taxpayers and not Wall Street. This bill fails in that regard. I urge it be rejected and let's start over with legislation that's built on American ideals.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. While other matters are being debated in the course of this, this rule also provides for consideration of a conference report on the Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act, and I rise in strong support of this legislation with a word of caution. It was my great privilege to serve on the conference committee for this Iran sanctions bill that will be considered today. I believe this legislation represents measurable and meaningful progress in the United States' effort to economically and diplomatically isolate Iran in the midst of its headlong rush to obtain nuclear weapons, and I urge my colleagues to support it. My word of caution is directed both to my colleagues in Congress, though, and to this administration. It is important not only that we adopt the Iran sanctions bill today, it is important that this administration implement this legislation. We know the nature of the threat. Iran has made no secret of its intent to use nuclear weapons to threaten the United States or our allies, especially our most cherished ally, Israel. President Ahmadinejad said in 2005 in Iran that humankind ``shall soon experience a world without the United States and without Zionism.'' Led by this anti-American, anti-Israeli president, Iran has a long history of associating with terrorist organizations. If Iran obtains a nuclear bomb, it will only be a matter of time before terrorist organizations around the globe have access to this technology, and America and our allies--and our most cherished ally--will be threatened as a result. It is also essential that we consider this legislation in the wake of the failed leadership at the United Nations. The adoption of so-called ``sanctions'' by the U.N. is nothing more than a hollow gesture which will do nothing except embolden Iran in its nuclear ambitions. We must lead by example. I urge my colleagues to adopt this bill. I urge the President to sign this bill. But a word of caution: These sanctions include a number of waivers demanded by the Obama administration, but it is essential that President Obama carry out the clear congressional intent and cripple Iran's energy and financial sectors in implementing this legislation. Iran could be merely months away from acquiring nuclear weapons; they continue to test vehicles that could deliver it. This is a time for decisive action by the American Congress and the American administration. Failure to act by this Congress or failure to implement these sanctions by this administration could lead to a second Holocaust. If we act and this administration implements these sanctions, we may yet see a future of security and peace in the Middle East, but if we fail to act, history will judge the Congress and this government in the harsh aftermath of a flash of light, a rush of wind, and a second historic tragedy. Let us act. Let us adopt Iran sanctions. And Mr. President, do not waive these sanctions.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Served by Casting Light on Spending in Elections-- DISCLOSE--Act. However, I must say, rarely has a bill fallen so short of doing what its title says. In fact, this bill does the opposite of its name by limiting free speech in the political process. The First Amendment says ``Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.'' That right is cherished by all Americans and is to be protected by this Congress. Unfortunately, this bill is a naked attempt to cloud the free speech rights of millions of Americans; rights that were clearly affirmed in January by the Supreme Court. It's for that reason that I am profoundly disappointed that the Democratic majority is trying to overturn the High Court's Citizens United decision. The justices were clear about the freedom of Americans to collectively participate in the political process through organizations. And the fact that the Court overturned a 20-year precedent speaks volumes about the importance of this issue. But, instead of standing on the side of free speech and the American people, this bill will cloud the court's decision and cause uncertainty about federal election law. And that would happen during the months leading up to the November midterm elections. Democrats suggest that the bill deals with corporations and unions even-handedly. That is false. In the interest of full disclosure, the American people should know that this legislation is sponsored by the two Democrats who are chiefly responsible for the election of Democrats to the House and Senate this fall. Perhaps that explains why this bill's provisions include enormous exclusions for union expenditures but place extraordinary limits on corporations to hinder their ability to participate in the political process, despite the clear directive of the Citizens United case. Corporations will have to make burdensome new identifying disclaimers. Companies that are government contractors or that received TARP bailout money will be banned from political speech. And this bill will suppress speech by those who choose to speak out through associations, a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution. This legislation is nothing more than an attempt to bring confusion to the political process and to discourage millions of Americans and thousands of organizations from becoming involved in the political debate. Campaign finance is an issue that I've been committed to since I first came to Congress. I've worked with Republicans and Democrats alike in an effort to bring more freedom to everyone involved in the political process. This bill sets back the freedoms affirmed just months ago by the Supreme Court. Mr. Chair, I believe that instead of greater government control of political speech, more freedom is the answer. And while such liberty may be a bit more chaotic and inconvenient for some in the political class, as Thomas Jefferson said, ``I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.'' The answer to problems in politics in a free society is more freedom, not less. I urge this body not to diminish the First Amendment for the sake of politics. Let's reject this bill and allow the American people to exercise their right of free speech and participate fully in the political process, as our Constitution intended.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during rollcall votes 388 through 392. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall Nos. 388, 390 and 392; I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall Nos. 389 and 391.

Mr. PENCE

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlelady for yielding and for her leadership on this important legislation. I also want to commend Chairman Berman, who worked in good faith on this legislation as well. It was an honor to serve on the conference committee, and I rise in support of the Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act. I believe this legislation is urgent, and it represents measurable and meaningful progress in the United States effort to economically and diplomatically isolate Iran in the midst of its headlong rush to obtain a usable nuclear weapon. It is important not only that we adopt the Iran sanctions bill today; it is important that this administration forcefully implement this legislation. We know the nature of the threat. Iran has made no secret of its intent to use nuclear weapons to threaten the United States and our allies. President Ahmadinejad said in 2005, humankind ``shall soon experience a world without the United States and without Zionism.'' Led by this anti-American, anti-Israel president, Iran has long associated with terrorist organizations, and this is the central point. Not only would this rogue regime come into possession of usable nuclear weapons should sanctions fail, but it would only be a matter of time before terrorist organizations around the world would have access to this technology. And that is unacceptable. But as we adopt these important sanctions, a word of caution. As has been noted, these sanctions include a number of waivers demanded by the Obama administration. It is essential that the Obama administration carry out the clear congressional intent of passing crippling sanctions on the energy and financial sectors in Iran. As the joint explanatory statement provides, ``The effectiveness of this act will depend on its forceful implementation.'' Iran could be merely months away from acquiring nuclear weapons. They continue to test vehicles that could deliver it. Now is the moment for decisive action by the Congress and decisive implementation. If we act and this administration forcefully implements these sanctions, we may yet see a future of security and peace in the Middle East. But if we fail to act, or if these sanctions are not forcefully implemented, history may well judge this Congress and this government in the harsh aftermath of a flash of light, a rush of wind, and a second historic tragedy. Let that not be the case. Let us act in concert today. Let us adopt these Iran sanctions. And, Mr. President, do not waive these sanctions.