Jared Polis

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Before further yielding, I yield myself a minute. Mr. Speaker, to hear the other side, they doth protest too much. Why does a party for whom 147 Members voted to spend $915 billion, causing the deficit, which is roughly a trillion dollars in size, essentially that $915 billion that they spent on their Christmas spending spree was the deficit, now they're complaining about it? And since the gentleman from South Carolina wasn't kind enough to yield to me, I'd like to ask him on my own time, the gentleman referred to whether or not ending Medicare was true, and obviously there's been a vital discussion about that, but the other assertion that I made is a very factual one, and I just want to confirm with the gentleman that the Paul Ryan Republican budget that the Republicans passed did indeed contain $5.1 trillion of deficit spending. Is that your understanding as well? Is that true? I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina for an answer.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank my colleague for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I rise today in opposition to the rule and the bill. Mr. Speaker, what exactly are we doing here? We could be talking about creating jobs for the middle class. We could be talking about a payroll tax cut extension. We could be talking about corporate tax reform, individual tax reform, and most importantly, we could be talking about solving the national deficit, about reducing government spending, about solving the deficit issue. But, instead, we're here playing this game of Kabuki theater. Rather than pursuing an agenda that isn't a Democratic or Republican agenda, but an American agenda that both sides all can agree on, we're here playing a counterproductive and absurd game. In fact, not only playing a game, we're replaying a game. We all remember the debt debacle last August that almost shut down Federal Government and led to a downgrade, potentially increasing interest rates and costing the government billions or hundreds of billions of dollars more in interest payments. For the first time in history, Standard & Poor's downgraded our country's credit rating, citing brinksmanship and political gridlock as motivating factors for their decision. Look, this is all Monday night quarterbacking. It's after the fact. The money has been spent. The money has been spent, and 147 Republicans voted in December to spend $915 billion in the appropriations bill, the omnibus appropriations bill, 147 Republicans, $915 billion, all of which was deficit spending. One hundred forty-seven Republicans spent $915 billion in deficit spending December 17th. That's a Christmas shopping spree, and now the credit card bill has come in January, and here they are saying we don't want to pay that credit card bill. The answer, Mr. Speaker, is not to spend the money if you're not going to make good on your bill. Every American family knows that. Once the money's spent it's after-the-fact political finger pointing, not looking to a solution for a deficit problem. And the Republicans have not put a solution on the table. Even the House Republican budget, the Paul Ryan budget that ends Medicare, creates $5.1 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years, $5.1 trillion in deficit spending. How many times will the Republicans have to raise the debt limit to have a deficit of $5.1 trillion? This Congress and the majority of this Congress on the Republican side are addicted to spending, Mr. Speaker, and until they are willing to entertain a real discussion--and the President of the United States, President Obama, has led the way by convening a commission, the Bowles- Simpson Commission, to try to take a bipartisan approach to actually solving the deficit situation. But rather than bringing any of those bills before the House, the Republicans passed the budget that not only ends Medicare but leads to $5.1 trillion in deficit spending and as recently as December 17th, spent $915 billion of deficit spending, the entire deficit for this year, essentially, around December 17th, because we had already spent the money that actually came in. And here they are in January, Mr. Speaker, saying they don't want to pay the bills. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from South Carolina complained about the President's budget, he complained about a lack of budget in the Senate. What he failed to acknowledge is that the budget the Republicans adopted in this body without a single Democratic vote not only ends Medicare, but leads to $5.1 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years, several times the deficit over the last 10 years; $5.1 trillion, a larger deficit spending than this country has ever had in a 10-year period, was supported and voted on and enacted by the Republicans in this House. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Americans are urging both parties, Republicans and Democrats, to work together to solve the basic challenges that this country faces, joblessness, a tax code that rewards those with well- connected lobbyists rather than hardworking Americans, and yes, to solve the budget deficit and budget crisis and ensure that we don't leave a legacy of debt for our children. And yet, we will deal with none of these issues today, none of these issues in the 2 days the Republican majority has scheduled us to work this week, amidst the biggest national recession since the Great Depression. And each time that President Obama and Democrats have sought consensus on these issues, the majority have bowed to radical elements within their party that insist on an agenda that is far outside the American mainstream and will lead to doubling the national debt over the next 10 years. Time and time again, we've seen the Republicans choose gridlock over problem solving. We saw this most recently when the House Republicans refused to allow a vote on the bipartisan compromise to extend the payroll tax break. You know, the American people are tired of political games. They want action rather than rhetoric; they want progress rather than partisanship. And with today's move, the Republicans are again playing the dangerous game of signaling to the world that America might not pay its debt, might not make good on the very money that the Republicans voted to spend in December. At a time when Standard & Poor's has moved to downgrade nine European countries' ratings, the last thing our Nation can afford is a risk of default. If we are further downgraded, Mr. Speaker, it would likely lead to an increase in the rate that we have to pay to finance our national debt. This would, in fact, increase the national debt even more than the Republicans want to increase the national debt--by $5.1 trillion. Yes, that very same Paul Ryan budget that ends Medicare as we know it and has $5.1 trillion of deficit spending could have $10 trillion or $20 trillion of deficit spending if the Republicans succeed in jeopardizing our credit rating by playing games with the full faith and credit of the United States of America. Like millions of responsible Americans, our Nation knows that we must make good on our obligations. Every minute that we waste debating this--I'll use what the other side has called it--debating this sham, the gentleman from Louisiana, this fig leaf, the gentleman from South Carolina, every minute we waste debating this underlying rule and bill is a minute that could have been spent enacting practical, substantial legislation to end the budget deficit, to right the fiscal course of this Nation, and put our country back on the road to economic recovery. I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I am prepared to close as well. I ask the Speaker how much time remains.

Mr. POLIS. Well, finally, Mr. Speaker, we have some bipartisan agreement. My colleague from Louisiana called this vote a sham. My colleague from South Carolina called this a fig leaf to disguise excess Republican spending. I think we have agreement on those basic concepts. Whether you call this a sham or a fig leaf, this bill, this process that the Republicans have put before us doesn't do a thing to solve the deficit, doesn't do a thing to rein in the national debt. It only perpetuates this Congress' addiction to spending, Mr. Speaker. By somehow pretending to say that we're doing something by making a fuss over whether we're going to make good on the full faith and credit of what we've already spent, rather than just not spend it in the first place, Mr. Speaker, we're misleading the American public into thinking that this Congress is tackling the national debt and the deficit, when all we're doing, as my friend from Louisiana said, is simply a sham. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Well, the gentleman from South Carolina didn't give me a chance to answer the question that he posed to me. He said, what's rich and what's fair? What I and many others have proposed is that people making over $1 million a year in income is who we're talking about, not people with a net worth of 2 or 3 million or less, but people who have an income, make $1 million or more a year in income, and the tax rate would go from 35 to 39.6 percent, a 4\1/2\ percent increase. That's what we're talking about as part of a comprehensive package. That's in the bipartisan Bowles-Simpson package, that's in the bipartisan Gang of Six package. That's some of the revenue that, along with cuts and entitlement reform, are part of the solution to this issue. Rather than bellyaching and complaining about having to do what Republicans themselves have said they were going to do in the Ryan budget and the Republican Study Group budget that's doubled the deficit--Republicans committed to doubling the deficit. I didn't support that. I voted against those bills. But Republicans promised to double the deficit. I opposed that. But here they are, now that they're doing the spending that they did, their massive spending spree in December, their budget that doubles the size of the national deficit, and here they are bellyaching, after spending all that money, that they don't want to pay the bill. Well, that's immature, Mr. Speaker. Let's rein in the spending, rather than not make good on the full faith and credit of the United States of America. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to quote from an article in The Hill. My friend and colleague Mr. Mulvaney from South Carolina said that this entire procedure ``is just a fig leaf for some Republicans to say they are against more debt, even though they essentially approved it.'' That's what we know this to be. This money has been spent. It's out the door. My colleague, Mr. Mulvaney from South Carolina, agrees and has put it into the Record. Even the budget from the Republican Study Committee, which the gentleman cited, calls for specifically raising the debt ceiling by $5.6 trillion, increasing the national debt by a third. That's not the answer. The President has led the way through the creation of the Simpson- Bowles Commission and their hard, bipartisan work to come up with a way to reduce the national deficit. The Republican Study Committee budget, the Paul Ryan budget, all of the budgets that the Republicans brought before the House increase the deficit substantially, more so than any Congress has in the history of this entire country. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. POLIS. You know, Mr. Speaker, sometimes it seems like we're arguing about a different bill in this Chamber. Many of those who have spoken on the other side have risen to attack government spending; and yet they voted for a budget with a $5.1 trillion deficit over a 10-year period, a bigger deficit than this Nation has ever had. Many of them also voted to spend $915 billion December 17th on their Christmas shopping spree, all deficit spending. And now they're complaining about a deficit that their votes caused. Let me assure you of something, Mr. Speaker. This Nation pays its bills. Families across America pay their bills. When families spend too much on Christmas gifts, the answer is not to not pay your credit card bill in January. The answer is to cut back on spending. That's what families across America know. That's what this Congress needs to know. That's common sense. Every Republican in this body, except for four, voted for a budget that called for specifically raising the debt ceiling from $14.3 trillion to $23.1 trillion. The House Republican budget voted to double the national debt over the next 10 years. We can and we must do better, Mr. Speaker. Let's get past these games and begin a real discussion about reining in the national deficit and starting to pay down our national debt. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my friend from South Carolina if he has any remaining speakers.

Mr. POLIS. Again, the Republicans doth protest too much. If there is concern about the budget deficit, why did every Republican who has spoken here today--every Republican except for four--vote to double our national debt over the next 10 years? Why has every Republican here voted for a budget that included $5.1 trillion in deficit spending, more deficit spending than this country has ever had in a 10-year period? I certainly hear complaints about President Obama and others. The President can't spend a penny--a penny--without congressional approval. So if the Republicans are concerned about the budget, why did they go on a Christmas spending spree where 147 Republicans voted to spend over $900 billion, every penny of it deficit spending? This makes no sense, Mr. Speaker. Let's address this budget deficit, as President Obama has charged us to do with the Bowles-Simpson Commission. Let's undertake a bipartisan approach to solve the deficit. This Nation shouldn't have a $5.1 trillion deficit, as the Republicans have voted on and passed. This body should not spend enough money to double the national debt by the year 2021, which every Republican except for four has voted for. Let's get to work, Mr. Speaker. This is all fun and games, but the country is burning while we continue to work to solve this issue and avoid the hard ones. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, today many Web sites across the Internet, from Reddit to Wikipedia, have blacked out their sites in protest of a bill before this body, the Stop Online Piracy Act, and its accompanying bill in the Senate, the PIPA Act. These bills threaten free discourse, free speech, and the very infrastructure of the Internet, itself. The Internet has brought this country and the world so much, not only in terms of the millions of jobs and economic productivity of American citizens, but far-reaching changes in terms of the Arab Spring and the Voice of Freedom desires across the world. SOPA and PIPA directly threaten the very Internet that has brought humanity great prosperity and greater peace. I call upon my colleagues to join in solidarity with Internet users across the world in making sure that we tackle online piracy in a way that doesn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentlelady from New York for the time. These last 2 weeks have really shown us the tax-and-spend Republican Party up close. First we passed a defense authorization with over $800 million in earmarks, according to a study by Claire McCaskill. Then we passed a huge omnibus spending bill that spent over $900 billion, actually increasing defense spending, all deficit spending, spending, spending, spending. But, oh, now it gets worse. Republicans are poised today to raise taxes by tens of billions of dollars. Worse yet, they are not even allowing a vote to keep taxes where they are. Whether this bill passes or not, make no mistake, it's purely symbolic as it advances no bill to President Obama to keep taxes where they are. And so they will go up on January 1 by $1,000 for the average American family, costing American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars without even helping reduce the deficit, since this Republican tax increase is money the Republicans already spent last week in the omnibus $900 billion spending spree. Spending, spending, spending. Taxes, taxes, taxes. The deficit goes up, up, up. You can't tax your way out of this budget problem this country is in, but the Republicans have been trying to do just that for these last few weeks. To solve our budget problem, we need to cut spending. Now, there are some balanced plans out there; and most experts agree that as part of a balanced plan with spending cuts, some revenues are necessary. In fact, President Obama put together the Simpson-Bowles bipartisan plan. The Republican leadership didn't allow a vote. The ``Gang of Six'' in the Senate put together a bipartisan proposal to cut spending and balance the budget. The Republican leadership didn't allow a vote. The supercommittee was supposed to come out with a budget fix that includes everything we're talking about here today--the SGR fix, the payroll tax, unemployment insurance--but it failed. The Republicans walked away. Now, President Obama and a bipartisan group of 90 percent of the Senate proposed not increasing taxes, and yet the Republicans are refusing to bring it to the floor. So, instead of a balanced plan with spending cuts, here we are on the heels of a huge Republican omnibus spending bill with record deficit spending and tax increases, raising taxes, and raising taxes on the middle class. The tax-and-spend Republican Party is here today and here to stay. Not only that, but while the people of the country are waking up, Congress is going to sleep. With 10 days left and so much work to do, Republicans took the evening off rather than working through the night to try to get something as quickly as possible so the Senate might be able to reconvene. They gave themselves the night off. Congress didn't even debate this topic or have a single vote yesterday night with 10 days to go. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, a ``no'' vote on the bill, and urge the Speaker and the tax-and-spend Republican leadership to let us vote now on preventing a huge tax increase on January 1.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Rule and the underlying bill. The bill we have before us allows for the indefinite detention of terror suspects, including U.S. citizens, without being charged and without the right to a trial. If enacted, this would be the first time since the McCarthy era that Congress has authorized the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens without this fundamental right. The bill's detainee provisions undermine our national security and violate the Constitutional principles we all adhere to. If we are truly considering the Nation's best interests--we should strip this bill of these harmful provisions. The federal criminal justice system has worked effectively to prosecute suspected terrorists throughout both the Bush and Obama administrations. This system has proven invaluable in producing counterterrorism information precisely because it provides incentives for suspects to cooperate. Further, the detainee provisions in this bill do not provide the president with the flexibility that is needed to successfully combat terrorism. Many of our Nation's most respected military leaders and national security leadership have come out against the detention provisions in this bill. In the past weeks, the director of the FBI, director of National Intelligence, Secretary of Defense, and head of the National Security Division at the Department of Justice have all spoken out against these detainee provisions. Instead of protecting our Nation, these detainee provisions will ultimately make our Nation less safe at a time when we need every counterterrorism tool available to defend our Nation from terrorist threats. We will not defend our country by shredding the Constitution or denying U.S. citizens of their most fundamental rights. We can defend our country while securing the basic freedoms that make America unique among the community of nations. I urge Members to respect our fundamental constitutional rights and protect our country's security by opposing this bill.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to provide a description and some color for this important bill, which passed this body last session in the 111th Congress without any objection and did not make it through the Senate last session. Well, I am proud to say that, since that point, Senate bill 278 has cleared the Senate. It's the companion to my bill, H.R. 643. There are some minor changes to comply with House rules that are going to be sent back to the Senate, and we sure hope that, expeditiously, we can get this bill to President Obama's desk because what we're trying to accomplish here is very simple and noncontroversial. It's the result of a longtime effort, far too long, by the Sugar Loaf Fire Protection District in Sugar Loaf, Colorado. This Fire Protection District came to national notice for their heroic efforts in the Fourmile Canyon Fire last year, which, remarkably, while it led to considerable property damage led to no loss of life, thanks in no small part to their heroic efforts. Sugar Loaf Fire Protection District and the U.S. Forest Service have always worked together very closely since the Fire District was created in 1967. The volunteer first responders at the Sugar Loaf Fire Protection District are the key to both wildland and residential fires in Boulder County, as well as car accidents and health emergencies in the communities and public lands that they so capably serve. However, until this bill becomes law, they're unable to make any improvements to their facility. They can't even add a much-needed restroom facility so that their volunteers can have the same type of plumbing that we can expect in this day and age. In its start, again, since 1967, the Fire District's physical home was established in an existing building on U.S. Forest Service land through a special use permit. Three years later a second building was constructed, another special use permit, both in important locations for accessibility on the few main roads that serve this mountainous area. This bill will exchange the small amount of Federal land on which these facilities exist with private land that's been purchased by the Fire District for this transfer, land that's better suited for the scenic and recreational needs of the public lands. It's a net gain for our Federal Government. While the U.S. Forest Service and these special use permits have been greatly appreciated over the 40-year history, it's important that the Fire District has the autonomy to direct its future, modernize its facilities, build basic amenities like running water and restrooms. And their location on public land has precluded them from making these modernizations, which we need to better protect both our wildlands and residential areas. The surrounding communities have grown considerably over the past decades, and these volunteer fire departments and the buildings that serve them have taken on additional responsibilities as community meeting centers, making it even more critical that we update them to facilitate this role. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Chairman Hastings' and Ranking Member Markey's efforts in bringing this bill to the floor, hopefully seeing this bill through to law soon. This bill's been passed out of both Chambers of Congress now, but just hasn't been able to make it past the finish line within a single Congress in one form, barely running out of time in the Senate last year. By the House agreeing to take up the Senate bill, I'm confident and thankful that this commonsense bill will finally become law. Again, I thank Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member Markey for bringing this bill to the floor. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this measure.

Mr. POLIS

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to require that we vote on an unemployment benefit extension and that we vote on a payroll tax holiday extension for next year before we leave for the holidays. I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. Today, there are very serious challenges facing our country, facing rural America, suburban America, and urban America. In the next 3 weeks, Congress has to address the payroll tax cut issue, or there will be an enormous tax increase, over $1,000 per family, to the American middle class. This Congress has to pass a budget or the government will shut down. This Congress has to address a number of other expiring tax provisions--all in the next 3 weeks. This is real work to do, real work that needs to be done for the American middle class, the American people, for farmers, for businessmen and -women, and for workers. And yet today, this body is not taking on real work. Instead, we're addressing an illusory problem, a fake problem rather than a real one. My colleague from Florida mentioned the specter of someone somehow regulating the dust kicked up by a truck on a dirt road. I don't think there's a single Member of this body that wants to regulate the dust that's kicked up by a truck on a dirt road. The EPA certainly doesn't. The farmers don't want us to. Members of Congress don't want us to. So what are we exactly talking about? Instead of addressing the serious problems that are facing the Nation, we're talking about a bill that satisfies talking points, has a few unintended consequences, which I'll get into in my remarks, and ignores the real problems of today. This bill before us claims to block the EPA from implementing a rule that doesn't even exist, hasn't even been thought up, and is opposed by the head of the EPA. That's right. We've got millions of unemployed Americans, a massive tax increase looming, and yet here we have a bill to stop the EPA from doing something it's not doing. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson just told Congress specifically that they have no intention of doing a rule in this area because the existing rules passed during the Reagan administration are adequate. So instead of worrying about a non-existent farm dust rule, maybe we should pass a regulatory ban on blowing smoke, because that's exactly what Congress is doing with this bill here today. Not only does this bill seek to address a non-existent problem, Madam Speaker, but it also has a number of unintended consequences. The new loopholes it creates in the mining and other sectors will have severe public health and environmental impacts. Now, there will be a number of amendments that have been allowed under this rule that will go into a discussion and tailoring of this bill to hopefully roll back some of these unintended consequences, but what this bill does, rather than solve a problem, is create a slew of new problems which we would need to address. This bill is chock full of exemptions for major industries. It allows for more arsenic and lead pollution from industrial sources, with dire consequences for health and well-being. It disables the ambient air quality standards within the Air Quality Act. This bill won't help farmers at all because it won't fend off any onerous regulation because none of the regulations that are being contemplated are even being thought of by anybody in the EPA. Interestingly, what this bill will do is it allows the release of more pollution from industrial sources like open-pit mining, coal- processing facilities, cement kilns and smelters. This has nothing to do with the family farms that you're going to hear people talk about debating this bill. That's why this bill's main supporters are not farmers, but they're the mining industry. In fact, this bill has gained vocal support from the National Mining Association; and one of the biggest groups representing farmers, the National Farmers Union, has said this bill isn't necessary. In fact, in October, National Farmers Union president Roger Jackson said, ``The National Farmers Union is pleased to see EPA Administrator Jackson provide final clarification for Members of Congress and the agriculture community that the agency does not have plans to regulate farm dust.'' He went on, ``Lately, there has been considerable anxiety within the farming community that EPA is going to regulate dust on farms. We hope this action finally puts to rest the misinformation regarding dust regulation and eases the minds of farmers and ranchers across the country.'' Yet, instead of letting sleeping dogs lie and quelling the ridiculous rumors that somebody plans to regulate dust kicked up from cars on dirt roads, here we have Members of this body reinvigorating and giving credibility to these false rumors, scaring the hardworking farmers of America into thinking somehow government is about to regulate something that no one is purporting to regulate. Furthermore, during committee consideration of this bill, an amendment by Congressman Butterfield would have explicitly limited this bill to agriculture, which is what the proponents of this bill purport it to be about. And yet the majority voted down that amendment, sending a clear message that this bill is not about farmers. Let us see this bill for what it really is--another effort to attack the EPA and prevent the EPA from implementing the Clean Air Act under its commonsense rules to protect our public health. It's time to get serious with the business of the House, to take on the real tasks that we have of expanding the payroll tax cut, passing a budget, and stop making up problems and making up solutions that cause more problems than they purport to solve. We've already got enough problems that this Congress and this country need to work on. Let's get to work. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, it is my honor to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

Mr. POLIS. I don't see how this bill would create any jobs, because it's purporting to undo regulations that don't exist and that aren't going to exist. So, obviously, if somebody at the EPA were to get the idea to start regulating farm dust, we would probably act to undo those regulations, which might help create jobs. Yet nobody is doing that, so this bill does absolutely nothing. I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.