Ted Poe

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, over the past several years, Southeast Texas has been the target during Hurricane Season. Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita hit in 2006 and the very recent Hurricane Ike in September 2008. Not to mention Hurricane Gustav, which did not cause a disaster in Texas, many believe it was just a trial run before Hurricane Ike. Hurricane Ike came along two weeks later on September 13, 2008. These hurricanes have taught emergency management officials to be prepared in time of a disaster. Through their preparedness they are able to assist and help other individuals evacuate the city in a timely manner. The most recent development is the Portable Inflatable Hospital presented by the East Texas Gulf Coast Regional Trauma Advisory. With the help of the emergency management officials, numerous area hospitals and others, this incredible development was established. State and federal Grants help fund the hospital that cost around 1.5 million. This portable hospital is a great way for medical personnel to assist patients during a disaster and for the patients to get the quick response medical help they need. The medical assistance can range from distributing medications to on site emergency care. The facility can operate as one or three separate facilities. It is equipped with beds, living areas, and other units. This project has had a great response from individuals willing to donate, but still needs any help it can get from our local Southeast Texans. The medical personnel and emergency officials are very grateful for this newly facility. It will be located in Southeast Texas, but can be set up across the state. The hospital will cost five thousand dollars to operate daily plus an additional twelve thousand dollars to generate the portable hospital. Emergency preparedness is very crucial in time of a disaster. With our great response teams in Southeast Texas the portable hospital will be ready in time of need. I would like to thank the individuals who spend endless hours preparing for Hurricane Season.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, growing up in Houston, Texas, I always liked this day, April 21, because it was a school holiday. I believed there was no school because it was my mother's birthday. She never told me differently. I was proud to be the only kid that had a mother with a school holiday. It was only later that I came to find out that the holiday also represented the most important military victory in Texas history, one that occurred near my hometown of Houston. It was a unique holiday for Texas called ``San Jacinto Day.'' It all started when Texas declared independence from Mexico on March 2, 1836. Texans held off the invading Mexican army at a place called the Alamo. They were led by a commander by the name of William Barret Travis, a 27-year-old lawyer from South Carolina. The 187 volunteers held out for 13 days and inflicted vicious casualties on the invaders. But Santa Anna, dictator of Mexico, was able to storm over the Alamo walls on March 6, 1836, and killed all the remaining defenders. He went looking for the rest of the Texans that wanted independence from Mexico. General Sam Houston had been building the Texas army, and Santa Anna's three armies from Mexico were giving chase. The Texans and their families fled east in what historians call the ``runaway scrape.'' Finally, near the San Jacinto River and Buffalo Bayou at Lynch's Ferry near Houston, Texas, they stopped to fight. Houston and his army of 700 faced Santa Anna and his army of twice that number on the marshy plains of San Jacinto. Scout Deaf Smith was ordered to burn the only bridge and trapped both armies on the peninsula between the river and the marshes. It was April 21, 1836. General Sam wanted to charge into battle the next day at dawn, but after discussions with his troops, he decided not to wait any longer. So in the middle of the afternoon, General Sam and the boys marched in a single line in broad daylight with little cover toward the Mexican army. The outnumbered Texans were an odd, terrifying-looking bunch. Without regular uniforms, they were dressed in buckskins, with pistols in their belts, bowie knives, long muskets, and tomahawks. They came from numerous States and foreign countries like Germany, England, Scotland, and Mexico. The Tejanos, Mexicans loyal for independence, were led by Captain Juan Sequin. So as not to confuse these Tejanos with Santa Anna's army, General Sam had Captain Sequin put a playing card in the headband of each Tejano so they could be easily recognized as Texans and not the invaders. This was General Houston's first Texas battle. Santa Anna's veteran army had yet to lose any conflict after they invaded Texas. The Texans charged down the hill yelling ``Remember the Alamo,'' ``Remember Goliad.'' They carried a flag of a partially nude Miss Liberty, and the fife played a bawdy house song called ``Come to the Bower.'' Santa Anna's army was caught napping and was routed. Most of the enemy were killed or wounded. The rest were captured or disappeared. The victory was stunning. The Texans wanted Santa Anna hung because of the Alamo and for murdering Colonel Fannin and his 13 volunteers at Goliad after they had surrendered. Wise and politically astute, Sam Houston would have none of the lynching and spared Presidente Santa Anna for later bartering power. Texas became a free and independent nation that day and claimed what is now Texas but also parts of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Wyoming, and Idaho, all the way to the Canadian border. It was one of the largest land transfers in world history as a result of one battle. The latter land was sold to the United States to pay for Texas' war debts. But Texas was a free independent republic for 9 years and then was admitted into the United States in 1845 by one vote. A Louisiana Senator changed his mind and voted for admission for the State of Texas to become part of the Union. Some now wished the vote had gone the other way. Texas still has the right, Mr. Speaker, to divide into five States. It also has the absolute right to fly the Texas flag at the same level of the United States flag because Texas was a country once. In 1936 Texans built the San Jacinto Monument in honor of the Texas War of Independence and General Sam's victory. It looks like the Washington Monument but it has a star on top. But, of course, Mr. Speaker, it's taller than the Washington Monument. Today the bugles are silent and the battlefield is surrounded by petrochemical plants. Not much is said about Texas Independence or San Jacinto Day. It's not a school holiday anymore. But once again this year, proud Texans were at the San Jacinto battleground today to honor the few brave Texans and Tejanos that made Texas a free nation. We remember our past, knowing we were a nation once, and sometimes we still act like an independent country. I have a grandson who was named in honor of William Barret Travis and Sam Houston. His name is Barret Houston. I flew the Texas Lone Star flag today proudly on this San Jacinto Day. But, also, Mr. Speaker, I sent my mom a bunch of flowers remembering that this glorious day was a school holiday to celebrate her birthday. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, the small town of Cleveland, Texas, lost one of their finest citizens this week when Fire Chief Steve Wheeler was killed. Steve was more than a Fire Chief. He was a fireman's firefighter--dedicated to the people of his town. Steve decided at 13 he wanted to be a fireman. He worked at the local barbershop and watched the firefighters next door at the station jump on fire trucks--and he got the urge to do the same. After high school, he drove an ambulance and joined the volunteer fire department. He has held just about every position there ever since--most recently, head of the Cleveland Emergency Management Department. That's the folks that take over during hurricane disasters. Steve will be remembered most for the 30 years as Chief of the Cleveland Volunteer Fire Department, for that firefighter spirit that he had, and that unwavering devotion to his firemen. Today, Chief Steve Wheeler answered his last call. Flags will be lowered; the final radio call will be made; and the final fire bell will be rung. Our prayers go out to the Wheeler family, the Cleveland Fire Department, and the good people of that entire community. Steve Wheeler--fireman, father, fine Texan. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from North Carolina for yielding. Mr. Speaker, the so-called Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act really doesn't help anyone. It's just feel-good legislation that makes Big Government bigger and costlier. It certainly doesn't help stop smokers from smoking. Our own Congressional Budget Office estimates that smoking by adults would decline by only .2 percent a year, or by just 2 percent over the next 10 years. This bill certainly won't help farmers, many thousands of whom will struggle to comply with the bill's regulations and who will be forced to entertain the Federal tobacco police coming on their properties to inspect their crops. It certainly won't help anyone who eats, drinks, or uses medication. An already dysfunctional and overburdened FDA will become even more distracted by this new Big Government program. And the bill certainly won't help Federal law enforcement officials. They should spend their resources policing real crime rather than arresting people for violating the tobacco laws. Regulations that drive up the cost of cigarettes and reduce their appeal will only benefit the smuggling industry. One advocate of the Big Government approach in this bill told a Senate committee that, We want to create Marlboros so they are like lard, but we want to regulate the contents, we want to regulate the toxicity, we want to regulate everything so it sits on the shelf and no one uses it, even though it's legal. That, Mr. Speaker, is a prescription for more prohibition that will lead to smuggling, lost revenue, and lawlessness. On top of everything else, H.R. 1256 places additional Federal restrictions on tobacco advertising. In other words, it's more speech control by the Feds. Some of the Federal regulations on advertising in H.R. 1256 include the following specifications for the size of warning labels on tobacco products, and let me quote. ``The text of such label statements shall be in a typeface pro rata to the following requirements: 45-point type for a whole-page broadsheet newspaper advertisement; 39-point type for a half-page broadsheet newspaper advertisement; 39-point type for a whole-page tabloid newspaper advertisement; 27-point type for a half-page tabloid newspaper advertisement; 31.5-point type for a double-page spread magazine or whole- page magazine advertisement; 22.5-point type for a 28 centimeter by 3 column advertisement; and 15-point type for a 20 centimeter by 2 column advertisement.'' Doesn't the government have better things to do than regulate the type of font used in tobacco advertising? Mr. Speaker, we have gone a little too far. The CBO estimates that the new fees on tobacco companies would be about $235 million in fiscal year 2009. The country's in a recession, people are out of jobs. Is this really the best time to tax companies for a program that really, on its face, will not work even though it sounds good? This is not reform. It's mindless Big Government that will only create more problems than the one it claims to address. I urge my colleagues to vote against more government bureaucracy, vote against this bill that won't stop smoking, vote against the rule and final passage. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, when most people think about taking a cruise, they imagine dream destinations, sunny days, and boatloads of fun. What people don't imagine is that these so-called fun ships are not free from crime. Sometimes American passengers disappear on the high seas or become victims of sexual or physical assault. You see, American passengers board these ships in U.S. ports and do not realize the ship is likely registered in a foreign country. That means these luxury ships are not required to report crimes to our government unless the crime occurs within U.S. territorial waters. This creates a serious problem for protecting the rights of Americans. As founder of the Victims Rights Caucus and a former judge, it seems to me Americans should be concerned by the absence of law enforcement on cruise ships, concerned by the lack of duty to report crime and concerned with the sometimes careless way that crime scenes are handled or not handled at all. Americans should be protected on U.S. soil or on the high seas. Representative Matsui's Cruise Vessel Safety and Security Act will help protect Americans on cruise ships. It's high time we take back the high seas. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, due to other congressional business in my district, I unfortunately missed recorded votes on the House floor on Thursday, March 26, 2009. I ask that the Record reflect that had I been able to vote that day, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes Nos. 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, and 162.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have the greatest respect for the ranking member, my friend, Mr. Smith from Texas, and I appreciate his legal analysis of this legislation. But I do rise in support of the Free Flow of Information Act. This act is a Federal shield law that would protect the identities of reporters' confidential sources. By protecting the sources of reporters, we protect the public interest and the free flow of information to the public. Forty-nine States and D.C. have some form of protection for reporters' confidential sources, but there is no Federal standard in place. This lack of consistency actually weakens State shield laws. Madam Speaker, if reporters back in Texas are worried about reporting the whole story to the public because someone might slap a subpoena in their face, the public suffers. Whistleblowers and other potential sources are more hesitant to come forward with information. Even though I am a former prosecutor, prosecutors should not make their criminal cases based upon confidential information that is given to reporters by forcing those reporters before grand juries to reveal the names of those sources. This bill protects the first amendment; in fact, it encourages the first amendment, while making appropriate exceptions for some serious criminal investigations. I want to thank my colleague from Virginia for introducing this important piece of legislation that supports the first amendment provision of a free press and encourages free speech by citizens. Therefore I urge the adoption of this legislation.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. I yield back the remainder of my time and urge the adoption of this resolution.

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, not a day goes by that law enforcement officers do not face danger in the mission to keep us safe from crime, acts of violence, and even terrorism. As founder and a co-chairman of the Congressional Victims Rights Caucus, I know unfortunately peace officers are also often victims of criminal conduct. After all, they are the last strand of wire in the fence between the law and the lawless. Over my years as a prosecutor and a judge, I have known several police officers who gave their lives for the rest of us. Today, we are grateful for the families and to the officers of California who selflessly gave their lives while protecting the rest of us: Sergeant Dunakin, Sergeant Romans, Sergeant Daniel Sakai, and Officer John Hege. Madam Speaker, on May 15, on the West side of the Capitol grounds, we honor all peace officers that have been killed in the line of duty in the United States. There will be thousands of peace officers from all over the United States, and the families of the slain will be not far from where we are today to honor those. This year we will honor four more from Oakland, California. I would like to thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for introducing this resolution and the chairman for expediting this legislation to the House.

Mr. POE of Texas. I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. POE of Texas. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, H. Res. 290. This resolution honors the lives of Oakland Police Department's Sergeant Mark Dunakin, Sergeant Ervin Romans, Sergeant Daniel Sakai, and Officer John Hege. Madam Speaker, just a little over 2 weeks ago on March 21, these peace officers were brutally slain while in the line of duty protecting the people of the State of California. These officers were valuable members of their police department, they were community leaders, and they were family men. They risked their lives every day to protect their fellow Californians, and at the end of the day, they were all killed for doing so. Sergeant Mark Dunakin was an 18-year veteran of the Oakland Police Department and resided in Tracy, California. According to his captain, the experienced homicide investigator was absolutely committed to every investigation he led. He leaves behind his wife Angela and their three small children. Sergeant Ervin Romans, ``Erv'' to his friends, was from Danville, California. He gave 13 years of service to the Oakland Police Department. He was a member of the police SWAT team and highly regarded for his work with the narcotics division in solving several complex drug cases in California. Sergeant Daniel Sakai of Castro Valley, California, was also a member of the police SWAT team. While he's remembered for his outstanding work on the SWAT team, he's also remembered and respected for his love of serving other people, most notably during his time as a community officer at the University of California in Berkeley. And he also taught English in Japan. He was a devoted husband and father to his wife Jennifer and their young daughter. Officer John Hege of Concord, California, was a 10-year veteran of the Oakland Police Department and was known by his colleagues for his willingness to help out with any department projects. Before joining the force, Officer Hege was a high school teacher and spent his free time umpiring high school baseball games. Madam Speaker, almost 40 years ago, four California Highway Patrolmen lost their lives in the line of duty in a single incident. Since that time, our Nation's law enforcement officers have made a considerable effort to reform police safety training programs and procedures. And because of that dedicated work over the past 20 years, we've seen a decrease in the number of police officers killed by gunfire. Although there has been great progress in protecting the safety of these men and women who wear the uniform, the death of these four officers serve as a reminder to the whole country that our Nation's law enforcement officials still face dangerous and potentially deadly situations every day. When a peace officer puts on a uniform in the morning, they represent everything that is good and right about our country. Today, we honor the lives and the commitment to protecting our community of these four peace officers. I urge the adoption of this resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POE of Texas. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has gotten into the business of picking winners and losers in the automobile industry. The government has decided that GM is a winner and Chrysler is a loser unless--Chrysler obeys the Federal Government and partners with Italian carmaker Fiat to begin producing Chrysler Fiat as automobiles. No telling what those cars will look like. Since when, Mr. Speaker, did the Federal Government get the authority to fire CEOs of private companies and take over their businesses? Well, the Feds did just that by taking control of GM and Chrysler. Now we should change the name of both companies to ``Government Motors.'' If you like the way Uncle Sam runs government businesses like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Post Office, FEMA, and the IRS, you will love the new Government Motors automobiles. The Federal Government is picking winners in the auto industry with taxpayer bailout money. We don't need any more bailouts. The government spends too much, borrows too much, taxes too much. The government needs to stop cutting deals with special interest groups and start cutting taxes for Americans. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, even though the alarmist global warming crowd claim humans are the evil CO2 pollutants of earth, the jury is still out on the theory of global warming. At a recent meeting of the International Conference on Climate Change, as reported by the Heritage Foundation, 31,072 American scientists subscribe to this statement: ``There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the earth's atmosphere and disruption of the earth's climate.'' Madam Speaker, how can this be? We're all told that global warming is a fact, and don't even argue this issue. Even though global warming is still a theory, it hasn't stopped the Federal Government from presuming it to be an absolute fact, and it now has an energy policy based upon the global warming theory. It proposes an energy consumption tax called the cap-and-trade, or the cap and tax on all Americans and all businesses that use any form of energy. Here's the plan. Every person and business that uses energy will be taxed for the use of that energy. For example, if a homeowner turns on the lights in their home, they will be taxed for the use of the electricity in that house. If a person wants hot water in their house and they turn on the hot water, coming from the hot water heater that's usually heated by natural gas, they'll be taxed for that use of that hot water because they're using the energy of natural gas. If you turn on the furnace in the winter in the Northeast, you'll be taxed because you're using home heating oil. All of these taxes are called the cap-and-trade, or cap-and-tax, as I call them. What this means is that it will increase the taxes of individual homeowners in this country, about 50 percent a year. And of course, it will raise taxes on businesses. Businesses, as they normally do, will send that tax on down to the consumer, and the consumer will have to pay for that tax. How much are we talking about? Individuals will have to pay an additional $1,800 a year for this new energy tax, this new cap-and-tax that will be placed on Americans. Madam Speaker, Americans don't need or want any more taxes for any reason. Supposedly, this money's going to be used to subsidize green energy products. Now we're learning that so-called renewable energy may be more expensive than the use of nuclear power and fossil energy. Madam Speaker, remember how we were all told that ethanol was going to save us all; how it's not going to pollute like crude oil; how it's going to be cheap renewable energy? Now we're learning something opposite. We learned that it costs too much to produce ethanol without a Federal subsidy. It caused a food shortage not only in the United States but throughout the world, because we had the idea that we should burn corn for energy. And we also learned that ethanol was, in fact, a pollutant. Now people don't talk so much about the benefits of ethanol, although the Federal Government has spent millions and millions of dollars with the ethanol program. Madam Speaker, no question about it. We need to explore all types of energy, solar, hydrogen, wind and nuclear. But we should also use the resources we have, like clean coal and crude. We need them to provide energy for Americans. Madam Speaker, America's the only country that doesn't use its own natural resources for its energy, and that includes the fact that we should drill offshore because that will bring jobs to America. It will keep money in America, instead of going overseas. And that lease revenue that the oil companies pay will go to the Federal Treasury. We need to do all of the above until we can move to alternative energy. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, the nationalization of the auto industry continues. The President has announced the Federal Government is going to exercise more forced control over American car companies. The President fired the CEO of General Motors and wants more automotive restructuring the Federal way. General Motors and Chrysler have already received billions in taxpayer bailout money and are poised to win favor with the White House for even more money. Madam Speaker, unfortunately, General Motors and Chrysler have already failed. Why should taxpayers continue to subsidize these failures? Why? Because the almighty Federal Government forces taxpayers to pay off these special interest groups. The government ought not to pick who wins and who loses in the business world. The free market should decide. General Motors and Chrysler should not receive any taxpayer money and should restructure under bankruptcy like other failed businesses do. But the socialization of the American economy continues. By the way, Madam Speaker, if you like the way the Federal Government runs other government businesses like the post office, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FEMA and the IRS, you will love the new federalized auto industry. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is not every day that Members of this Chamber come to the floor and share personal stories of sacrifice and ultimately triumph. But this week, a colleague of mine that I deeply admire and respect came to this floor and did just that, and I think she deserves to be recognized for her tenacious courage and even her willingness to be vulnerable. We both came into Congress the same year, but we come from different parts of the country, we are of different parties, and we don't always agree on the answers for the issues the people of our Nation face every day. Even so, as we in the people's House continue to busily deal with our national concerns, we should never fail to recognize the courageous that are among us, those who are bold and strong. Let me explain, Mr. Speaker. This Monday, the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) shared with us a deeply moving story about the personal battle that she has had with breast cancer. It is a situation that many of our mothers, wives and daughters have also struggled with. About 1 year ago, Ms. Wasserman Schultz was diagnosed with breast cancer. And after medical treatment and, in the end, surgery, the cancer was removed from her body and she is now cancer free. What makes Representative Wasserman Schultz so remarkable is the way she responded to this difficult situation. Rather than become discouraged by her circumstances, she decided she was going to help other women who might also be battling breast cancer and other forms of cancer that really affect America's women. So, this week she is introducing legislation meant to empower women to know how to deal with breast cancer and teach women and doctors alike about the risk factors and the warning signs. I was pleased to become one of the first cosponsors of this legislation to make America's women healthier. Mr. Speaker, I don't know how many people who would have the courage to use their own personal story to help change the lives of others. But as the father of three daughters and the grandfather of four girls, it doesn't surprise me that it is a woman who is setting the example for the rest of us. Representative Wasserman Schultz is a model of courage and conviction. I'm proud to serve along with her in the people's House. My grandmother used to tell me that nothing is more powerful than a woman that has made up her mind. Grandma was right. And Debbie Wasserman Schultz is one of those women who has faced the enemy of cancer, fought it, defeated it and has made up her mind to help other women of this Nation do the same. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I bring you news from the border war with the cartels. Our Homeland Security Director has recently announced the effort to beef up the ports of entry on our southern border by using the Federal agencies of the ATF, the DEA, and more Border Patrol, mainly at the ports of entry. I am encouraged that we have finally recognized that we have a problem on the southern border, but the plan unfortunately omits the obvious: The problem is not at the legal ports of entry; the problem is between the legal ports of entry; and between the legal ports of entry we ought to use the National Guard. The reason being is Mexico is engaged with the battle of the cartels, and they use the military. They have several thousand on their border. Why? The cartels are an army of evildoers. They commit beheadings, murder, corruption, and terror along the border. It is violent, and it is now becoming a cross-border problem. So let's be serious about the border war with the cartel. Let's join Mexico, and put our National Guard on the border. The Texas Governor and the Arizona Governor have both asked for the National Guard. They should know that they need that help. We need the National Guard to squeeze out the vicious cartel army and put them out of the business. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and her comments especially. Mr. Speaker, we are discussing the proposed budget. And disregard whether it has some good projects in it or not. It breaks the back of the American citizen. And we hear a lot of numbers about how much it is costing and, of course, it does cost too much. But I will try to put it in perspective. I have four kids, 7\1/2\ grandkids. Mr. Tiberi just had triplets. Mrs. Bachmann's got a handful of kids. And when kids are born, every parent remembers that they are given an arm band, and the arm band usually says who that child is. My kids all had an arm band that said ``Poe kid.'' They're going to have to change arm bands on my grandkids from Poe kids to just poor kid because every child born after this budget passes will have to pay off the debt to the tune of $70,000 a piece. So when kids are born in America, if this budget passed, give them an arm band that says, you owe Uncle Sam $70,000. Mr. Speaker, that is disgraceful that we are saddling debt on kids yet to be born in this country. So much for freedom. They are going to be enslaved to the Federal Government to the tune of at least $70,000 a piece. And that doesn't count all these other spending programs that we are seeing going to come down the pike later this year. Maybe we should remember some of the things that Thomas Jefferson said. Of course he helped write, or he did write the Declaration of Independence. He wrote a lot while he was President. Here's a quote from Thomas Jefferson, Mr. Speaker. He said it in 1821, shortly before he died. He said, ``There does not exist an engine so corruptive of the government and so demoralizing of the Nation as a public debt. It will bring on us more ruin at home than all the enemies from abroad.'' Wise Thomas Jefferson. Maybe we would do well to read some of the things that Thomas Jefferson wrote about saddling American taxpayers with public debt. It is worse than our foreign enemies we have got all over the world. We cannot afford to pay for this budget because we don't have any money. We have spent it all. We have given it to, you know, these banks that can't fail, and all these other special interest groups. So we are broke. So we are going to have to borrow the money. And we are going to have to borrow the money from foreign countries. Number 1 on the list, the Chinese. You know, our good friends, the Chinese. We are going to borrow their money. It was embarrassing to me, as a citizen, to see our Secretary of State go to China and beg to allow us to borrow money from them in the future. Even they are a little worried about whether we can pay off this great debt that we are incurring and putting on kids yet to be born. It is disgraceful, Mr. Speaker. And the second thing is, if we can't borrow enough money, the government's answer is, we will just tax them. Tax them to death. You know, the old statement goes, if something moves, regulate it. If it keeps moving, tax it. And if it stops moving, then subsidize it. We are doing all of the above right now. Things that aren't doing any good for the economy, oh, we are subsidizing those. But we are taxing the American taxpayer to death, those that work for a living. And we are also taxing those small businesses. I want to make one thing clear about jobs. We hear so much about the budget is going to create jobs. Jobs, jobs. Well, we have to define what a job is. There are government programs, and those are not jobs. A government program takes taxpayer money and gives it to different projects to build something. Now, that is not a job because that is subsidy by the American taxpayer to this entity. Jobs are not created by government. Jobs are not created by government. Small businesses create most of the jobs in this country because, you see, when small business has money, we call that capital, thus the term capitalism. When they have money they hire people. The taxpayers don't have to subsidize that worker, whereas the taxpayers have to subsidize the government program worker. So let's be clear about that. There are jobs, and then are real jobs. And so we should do everything in our power to help small businesses, because they create 70 percent of the jobs in this country. But this new budget, loaded down with borrowing, is also loaded down with taxes. And it taxes the producers of this country. Like I said, if something keeps moving we just tax it. And that is the plan. And it seems to me, this is just my opinion, this whole philosophy that we are moving to in this country is a government-controlled culture, government-controlled society; kind of makes us look like the French socialist society, in my opinion. And I don't think that is what liberty is all about. So maybe we should go back to some basics. Like most American taxpayers, they don't spend money they don't have. Maybe the government shouldn't spend money it doesn't have. Maybe we shouldn't be borrowing money because we have to pay the debt on it. And we are not going to live to see it, so we are passing that debt on to our kids yet to be born, to the tune of $70,000 a piece. And that ought not to be. But that's just the way it is. I yield back my time.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, 188 years ago, the Greeks brought forth another democracy, but their philosophy started hundreds of years ago. They did not just bring the world a relentless warrior who was willing to give everything to defend the sacred honor of the Greek Nation, but they brought the world a concept that was novel, because of no other country can it be said that they brought to the world a philosophy that it was the individual that is more important than government, itself, more important than the State, because always before in all cultures the State was the supreme power over the individual. Yet the Greeks had the novel concept that the human being, the individual, is worth more than the State. Because of that seed, democracy was planted, and democracy now flourishes throughout the world with the basic premise that it is the individual who is all important. So we honor them tomorrow because of their great heritage, because of their great influence on our democracy, but we also honor them because they gave to the world a concept of freedom and worth of the individual that had never before been known to any civilization.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, over the last few years, numerous reporters in the United States have been subpoenaed about their confidential sources. Law enforcement, namely prosecutors, hear about a story that a news reporter covers regarding scandals, corruption, crime, or coverups, and then has the reporter subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury. The purpose of the grand jury investigation is to find out who gave such information to the reporter, with the goal to bring the confidential source before the grand jury to testify. Most States protect journalists from having to reveal that source. However, there is no Federal law to shield the identity of confidential sources. The protection of the source's identity is important because, without such a guarantee, sources would be fearful of possible reprisals if they revealed the information. Thus, the public would never know about the information. With a few exceptions, prosecutors should not depend on reporters and their sources to root out crime. If whistle-blowers and reporters are protected by a shield law, the public's right to know will be enhanced with the free flow of information. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, in 1918, the war to end all wars was over. It was called World War I. It started in 1914, ended in 1918. And during that time, it was a stalemate until 1917 when the United States entered the war. The United States went overseas to Europe. Those doughboys fought in a land they did not know and for a people they did not know. They broke the trench warfare stalemate, and on the 11th day of the 11th month at the 11th hour of 1918, that Great War was over. Fifteen million people in the world died because of World War I. And the casualties for the United States? Well, 4,734,991 Doughboys and Marines went over there to fight in that Great War; 116,561 were killed representing and defending our country. They fought in the woods, in the forests of Belleau Wood, the Argonne, and the fields of Flanders. Many of them are still buried in those forests in graves known only to God. When they came home, thousands more had contracted the Spanish flu, and they died here in the United States. When the war was over, America moved on, and now 101 years later, we honor troops from that last century. We have on the Mall here not far from this Capitol the Vietnam Memorial where we honor the 55,000-plus that were killed; we honor the Korean veterans with the Korean Memorial that has those American soldiers going through a minefield in the snow; and we honor the Greatest Generation with the World War II Memorial. But in the tall weeds of the Mall, there's a little-known memorial for the D.C. veterans that fought in World War I. It is decrepit, it is falling apart, and like I said, it is in the high weeds. It was built largely because the kids here in Washington, D.C., saved their nickels so that memorial could be built. But Mr. Speaker, we do not have a memorial on the Mall for all of the Americans who fought in the great World War I. America just never got around to it. So I have introduced the Frank Buckles Lone Survivor Act to expand the D.C. memorial so that it honors all that fought in World War I. Why Frank Buckles? Because you see, Mr. Speaker, Frank Buckles is the lone American survivor from World War I. He's 108 years old. In World War I, he lied to get into the Army: he was probably 16; he should have been 18. But he went off to war in Europe and drove an ambulance and rescued other doughboys that had been wounded in France. After the war was over, he came back to America. And during World War II, he was captured in the Philippines by the Japanese and held as a prisoner of war for 3 years. And now he lives in West Virginia. Mr. Speaker, here is a photograph of Frank Buckles, 108 years old. It is taken in front of what is left of the D.C. memorial. And what I am asking Congress to do is authorize the expansion of the D.C. memorial to include all who fought in World War I. You know, the men that fought there should be honored by America. Even though I have offered this bill into legislation, government bureaucrats are opposed to this memorial, saying we don't need any more memorials on the Mall. That dishonors America's war dead, Americans the bureaucrats never even knew. But kids across the Nation are answering the call of Frank Buckles. And let me explain. What is occurring is, service-learning projects in schools throughout the country are teaching their kids hands-on about World War I and those that lived and fought and died in World War I. It started in Creekwood Middle School in my home district, and now it has spread to schools in Kentucky, Connecticut, Michigan and Ohio. And because of that, these kids are raising funds to build this World War I memorial for all that lived and died in this war. Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that we as a Nation honor all that fought in the four great wars in the last century. And it is a shame we haven't built a memorial to them. But I can tell you something, Mr. Speaker. America's school kids will not be denied because they are the grassroots campaign to build that memorial, and they are raising funds to do it. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing more powerful than American school kids that have made up their minds, and they have made up their minds that America shall honor the war dead of World War I, the Frank Buckles and all of those four million-plus that served with him. And we're going to build this memorial whether the Federal bureaucrats like it or not. And that's just the way it is. Schools Involved in the Effort Terryville High School, Terryville, CT Bristol Eastern High School, CT Kingwood High School, Humble, TX Creekwood Middle School, Humble, TX Riverwood Middle School, Humble, TX Zeeland public schools, Michigan Buckeye public schools, Ohio University of Arkansas at Montecello Michigan State University ROTC Program Hudsonville Public Schools, Michigan

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the proposed budget is going to double the national debt. What that means to Joe Sixpack is every American will be responsible for $70,000 apiece to pay off this massive debt incurred by money-grabbing government. Does anyone know there's a recession going on? Government cannot spend America into prosperity with somebody else's money. We shouldn't even be borrowing more money during these hard times. The Treasury Secretary says part of the reason government got into this economic mess was government borrowing. Also, government has plans to raise taxes on working citizens to pay for all these fancy projects in the budget. Americans already pay too much in taxes during this recession. Americans don't want more taxes. Americans don't want to incur more debt. Americans don't want government to spend money it does not have. Government is taking America's money to reward failure, and sending money to special interest groups. Meanwhile, Americans are losing their jobs. Americans are tired, weary, and mad about government ``ripoffs, payoffs, and layoffs.'' And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the government answer to government- created problems is to tax people and businesses that are producing. The economic philosophy is simple: Punish success by the power of the tax. The latest government tax plan is the energy tax. The idea is, tax anything that uses energy. And it contains several philosophies. The first one is raise the gasoline tax 10 cents. I guess the government bureaucrats don't think gasoline prices are high enough already. Americans pay 18 cents in Federal gasoline tax, about 20 cents in State tax; and gasoline is approaching $2 a gallon, so they are going to raise taxes and make it harder for us to drive. But that is not all. The idea also is to tax mileage of cars. It is called the car user tax. In other words, for every mile an American citizen drives, they are going to get taxed for that mile. Of course, that hurts people in rural areas, it hurts people who don't have mass transit and don't have a choo-choo train to ride to work. But it is the car user tax, and we don't know yet how much that is going to be. But we have more. The idea also is to tax the use of energy in your home. In other words, when you turn on the lights, you are using electricity and you are going to get taxed for using that energy. If you have hot water in your home and you use a hot water heater that is run by natural gas and you turn on the hot water, since you are using natural gas you are going to get taxed again for the use of energy. And of course in the winter in some places in the United States they use home heating oil to keep warm in the winter. And since they are using energy, they are going to get taxed for that. It is the home use energy tax on all Americans. And of course the same is going to be applied to businesses. But businesses, they are going to pass their taxes on down to the consumer who has to pay all of those taxes as well. There is more. There is the cap-and-trade tax, or the cap tax as I call it. What that is, it is based on the unproven mythical theory of global warming and the use of CO2; so if you use any CO2, you are going to get taxed for that. There are other taxes. Those include taxes on energy production. What that is, is those businesses--we call them oil companies--that produce energy for the rest of us to use, they are going to be taxed with so many different taxes I don't have time to go through it; but what it amounts to, it will cost the American consumer another 41 cents per gallon of gasoline to pay for that tax on energy production that is being passed from the oil companies down to the American consumer. And, of course, the effect of that, whether intended or unintended, will be to send those energy-producing companies, those oil companies, somewhere else. We already find out that some of them are moving to Switzerland. When that happens, we will get less tax revenue to begin with. You see, we already have the second highest corporate income tax in the world. And why would we fault oil companies for moving overseas when they are already paying so much taxes? And these energy taxes will increase and encourage people to move offshore and to other places. Mr. Speaker, whether people know it or not, we do not have alternatives for the use of crude oil or gasoline yet. Some day we might have one of those electric cars that we all get to drive around in, but we don't have it now. So if we keep sending energy companies overseas, make it harder for them to produce, tax the energy consumption, it is going to be more difficult for us to exist in this world. So why don't we do something a little novel. Why don't we allow more energy exploration, instead of continuing to subsidize the Middle Eastern oil countries who don't like us anyway. If we explore more, that will create jobs that stay in America. It will bring revenue to the American Treasury, because those oil companies have to pay for those leases. We can then get more tax revenue from those oil companies, and money will stay here, instead of shipping it overseas to foreign countries. A novel idea. And there is not a tax included in any of that. But it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that the current bureaucrats never saw a tax they didn't like. So we will all just get to ride bicycles and freeze in the cold dark of winter, and for light we will have to use candles since we can't afford to pay the electricity tax on our homes. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. POE of Texas

Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the historical comments my friend from Vermont has said regarding Union troops from his home State. The Battle of the Wilderness took place in May 1864. On the second day of the 3-day battle with a statement made by General Lee, ``Texans always move them,'' the Texas Brigade successfully forced back Grant's Union troops. However, the Texans sustained 60 percent casualties. There were 165,000 troops, Union and Confederate, in this Battle of the Wilderness. That is the number of troops that we have in Afghanistan and Iraq put together on one battlefield. There were 29,000 casualties. The fighting was so fierce in the dense woods it caught fire, and hundreds of wounded on both sides burned to death. Their graves are only known by God. Mr. Speaker, those troops from the North and South were all Americans. Mr. Speaker, here is the battlefield. It is outlined in this black line. On this hallowed ground right here, you can see this X is where Wal-Mart wants to build one of their beautiful stores. There are other locations available for Wal-Mart. So we from the North and South in a bipartisan way want Wal-Mart to build someplace else. And that's just the way it is.