Bill Posey

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. I don't know how many deadbeat taxpayers are in Venezuela or Cuba or Iran, but I think it's ludicrous to think that we would want to put American investments in other countries. We're looking at, according to the Mercatus Center at George Mason, a possible capital flight of $88 billion, and this is opposed to maybe, at the high side estimating, we'll recover $800 million from tax cheats, hopefully. That's just not a good percentage. That's not a good investment. That's bad business in any sense of the word. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of a good commonsense bill that will help our economy recover and help America stay strong.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Richard Keith Salick whose recent and sudden passing has left a hole in the hearts of the entire Space Coast community as well as surfing enthusiasts worldwide, lifelong friends, family, and those affected by kidney disease. Born October 6, 1949, Richard and his twin brother, Phil, learned to surf together in their early teenage years, traveling to exotic surfing hot spots around the world making a name for themselves and eventually both were invited to join Dewey Weber's California-based Surf Team. At that time, Dewey Weber's team had only a limited number of team members from the East Coast but it also consisted of the top surfers in the world. As Richard worked his way up the up the ladder, he earned a spot on the United States Surfing Team, was selected to join the World Contest Team and signed a contract with Hobie Surfboards. A short time later, at the age of 23, Richard fell ill and was told he needed a kidney transplant. Aided by his twin brother Phil, who was his first kidney donor, Richard recovered but was told all physical sports were out of the question--including surfing. After a year of recovery, Richard could no longer ignore his desire to return to competitive surfing. He was the first person to develop an ``Ensolite'' padding system which he strapped around his abdomen to protect his transplanted kidney and went on to place second in his first competition. Richard continued to win surf contests and proudly displayed one of his trophies at the dialysis unit at Shands Hospital in Gainesville, Florida, inspiring other kidney patients. Richard continued to surf professionally and was dubbed by Nephrology News as ``the First Professional Athlete to Return to Active Competition after a Transplant.'' Upon retirement in 1980, Salick was ranked the Number 1 surfer on the East Coast in the 24-35 year old division. In 1985 Richard and his brother Phil co-founded the National Kidney Foundation Pro Am Surf Festival raising millions of dollars over the years. This festival is one of the largest charitable surfing events in the world. ``Richard Salick has received many prestigious awards over his lifetime including the ``Nancy Katin Award'' at the United States Surfing Championships in Huntington Beach, California. This award was given to one competitive surfer each year and voted on by all the worldwide surfing association presidents. ``Rich also built eleven-time world champion surfer Kelly Slater's first surf board in Cocoa Beach. Over the course of Richard's life, he endured a total of three kidney transplants all donated by his brothers Phil, Chan and Wilson. In January of 2000, Salick was inducted into the Surfing Hall of Fame as an ``East Coast Surfing Legend'' and was also inducted into the Black Belt Martial Arts Hall of Fame in 2008 along with his son David. Besides being an accomplished surfer, inventor, inspirational speaker, and post transplant athlete, Richard would say that his greatest accomplishment was raising his two sons Philip and David, both world class athletes. Richard has personified the successes of extreme sports activity post transplant and has served as an inspiration to all he met including transplant patients around the world. He will be missed but his legacy and spirit will live on.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. POSEY. We were at home watching NASCAR on television a couple of years ago, and my wife said, What are the armed services doing sponsoring NASCAR cars? Don't they have a better use to spend their money than to spend those big bucks on NASCAR? And I said, Well, Katie, I can understand why you would think that. But, you know, we have a volunteer military, and they have to advertise for recruits somewhere. Where would you think the money would be better spent? Do you think they should advertise at the philharmonic? Or maybe you think they should advertise at the ballet. We could surely get some burly, mean paratroopers if we advertised at the ballet. I think that NASCAR is a very appropriate place to advertise for recruits, just like boxing rings might be, cage fights might be. So I made some inquiries about it to our armed services, and they said, you're exactly right on point. As our good friend, Mr. McHenry, from North Carolina shared with you a little while ago, the statistics are overwhelmingly in favor of expenditures where you get the greatest return. And the NASCAR sponsorship seems to have the greatest return, which results in the greatest savings for our taxpayers back home. Now, I wish we were spending this time right now, rather than trying to micromanage how our military most efficiently advertises for recruits, discussing the $14 billion our government overpaid to people who were not entitled to unemployment compensation, but got it anyway. I wish right now we were discussing the $4 billion in refunds in the form of tax credits our government has given to bogus dependents of people who are here illegally. I wish we were talking about the millions of dollars we've wasted in the GAO. I wish we were talking about the millions of dollars we've wasted in crony capitalism investment in Solyndra and the like, and so-called green energy enterprises. But no, we're not. We are sitting here today. Some people are trying to micromanage how our military gets recruits for its all-volunteer Army, and they are telling the people who are best at managing our military how to do their jobs. It's an old adage. It's an old cliche. It seems like everybody knows how to make a baby stop crying except the person holding it. I think, in this case, that applies, and I think we should yield to the best judgment of our armed services in how they feel they need to recruit. I have seen Democratic Presidential candidates advertise on NASCAR. I saw a Democratic gubernatorial candidate advertise on race cars. As far as Okeechobee Speedway, I was at Okeechobee Speedway once, and I ran into somebody from the other side of the aisle whom I never expected to see at a racetrack. I said, What are you doing here? She said, Well, when person ``blank,'' who was running for Governor, decided we needed to focus on middle America, she decided she wanted to sponsor a race car at Okeechobee Speedway. Before that, I didn't even know there was an Okeechobee Speedway. She said, Do you know what? It was the best investment of campaign money we've ever spent. These are from the other side of the aisle. I'm sure I could talk a lot about my friends on this side of the aisle and about how they've made good and wise investments, too. Again, in this case, I'd like for you to rely upon and reflect upon the comments made by Mr. McHenry, who talked about the very pure and simple results and accountability that has been achieved by letting the military--the people we trust the most with protecting our country and our freedoms--do the job that they are entitled to do. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my support for the bill before us today that would repeal the health care law. The new health care law is unworkable, unaffordable, compromises the doctor-patient relationship, and undermines individual liberty and personal freedom. It was for these reasons and others that I opposed the bill two years ago. Let's remember that this health care law was drafted behind closed doors and the American people were told by congressional leaders at the time that Congress had to pass it so that the American people could see what was in the 2,000-page bill. Americans have begun to see more of what is in the bill, and according to the latest polls most Americans want the law repealed. Dozens of states, including Florida, have indicated that they will do what the Supreme Court has said they can do, and that is to refuse to implement key components of the law. For America's senior citizens there are key provisions of this law that are of great concern. The Congressional Budget Office's March 1, 2010 analysis concluded that the health care law cuts Medicare spending by at least $500 billion. It also leaves in place the flawed Medicare physician payment system that threatens senior's access to physicians as it allows a 33% reimbursement cut to take effect on December 31, 2012. This will harm seniors' access to medical care. The new health care law makes deep cuts to Medicare Advantage plans, which will result in millions of seniors' losing their MA health plans. In fact, millions of seniors' were scheduled to lose their MA plans on December 31, 2012, except that the Administration ``found'' money to plug the hole for one year so that seniors would not receive a letter two months from now telling them that their MA health plan would no longer be available to them. Seniors are also very concerned about the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which has broad unbridled authority to unilaterally eliminate Medicare benefits. IPAB must be repealed. Americans were promised that they would be able to keep their current health care plan, but millions of Americans would have already lost their plan had a temporary waiver not been granted to simply delay their loss until next year. Millions more will lose their current coverage and be forced into government directed health care in 2014 if this law is not repealed. Americans were told that the law would save money and would ``only'' cost $938 billion. However, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently raised the 10-year cost of the law to $1.8 trillion. The United States has a national debt of over $16 trillion and we simply cannot afford the new law, as it will continue to saddle future generations of Americans with debt they cannot possibly repay. We were promised the health care law would ``lower your premiums by $2,500 per family'' by the end of 2012. But even the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2011 Annual Health Benefits Survey found that premiums increased by over $1,200 in just the first year since the law's passage and they expect premiums to continue climbing. We do not need the health care law's 159 new federal agencies and boards that are being created to stand between you and your doctor. Twelve of the nearly two dozen new taxes included in the law will specifically increase taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year. These new taxes will not make health care any cheaper, but will further add to the tax burden that is straining family budgets and hampering the ability of small businesses to create jobs. While I believe that there are shortcomings in our health care system, this health care law was the wrong prescription, and it is for that reason it should be repealed and replaced with a plan based on individual choice, personal liberty and economic freedom.

Mr. POSEY

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

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It prohibits taxpayer dollars from being used for the Department of Transportation's International Highway Technology Scanning Program. According to the Department of Transportation, this program enables the Department's officials to access innovative technologies and practices in other countries that could significantly improve our Nation's highways. I, and most taxpayers, really don't have any problem with that. If someone else has a good idea, we can and we should learn from that. But most taxpayers were outraged when ABC News and Citizens Against Government Waste highlighted that this program was bankrolling globe- trotting junkets across the world. One such trip featured a 17-day ordeal to Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Great Britain to look at billboards, all the while, racking up taxpayer bills at five-star hotels and restaurants. Among the important research conducted by the team was a trip to Scotland to evaluate ``road furniture along rural roads.'' And in the Netherlands they took a serious look at ``examples of outdoor advertising.'' When the Federal Government is up to its neck in debt, such expenditures truly are an abuse of the taxpayers. As a result, Citizens Against Government Waste was able to apply enough pressure to the agency to suspend the $1.2 million annual program. We're not really sure what ``suspend'' means, if it's for a day, a week, or a month. ABC News reported that upwards of $12 million has been spent on the program since the year 2000. I see the suspension of the program by Transportation Secretary LaHood as a really good start, but there is still no guarantee that such waste will not resume, as nothing in law would prevent the program from being resurrected in the future. This amendment, very simply, will ensure that the program will not come back to life during the fiscal year 2013. Mr. Chairman, Washington is approaching another trillion-plus deficit. We simply cannot afford five-star junkets. I urge support of the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to my colleagues' attention to the Posthumous Purple Heart Ceremony of WW I Veteran Mr. Charles Henry Klingelhoefer born April 16, 1876 in Baltimore, Maryland, taking place in Brevard County, Florida, He is survived by his niece Ms. Diane Roberts Vess of Melbourne. More specifically, on February 6, 2012, the United States Coast Guard will honor the memory of the brave men who served on the United States Coast Guard Cutter Tampa. Mr. Klingelhoefer, one of five brothers, was assigned to the United States Coast Guard Cutter Tampa, and served as a Warrant Carpenter. The Purple Heart was presented in honor of those who received fatal wounds in the sinking of the United States Coast Guard Cutter Tampa at 8:45 p.m. on September 26, 1918--the largest known loss of life by any U.S. naval combat unit during World War I. Under the command of Captain Charles Satterlee, the Tampa served as a convoy escort protecting ships carrying critical Allied war material in European waters. The officers and crew earned the praise of the commander of the United States Naval Forces based at Gibraltar for the ship's wartime operational effectiveness. On that fateful evening, having just completed another successful escort mission from Gibraltar to the United Kingdom, the Tampa departed the convoy and proceeded toward the port of Milford Haven, Wales. A short time later, the shock of an explosion was felt by several of those remaining in the convoy. U.S. destroyers and British patrol craft conducted a three day search of the Tampa's last known position, but found only two unidentified bodies and a small amount of wreckage identified as belonging to the Tampa. German records suggest that the Tampa was sunk by U-Boat 91 because it had reported sinking an American warship fitting the Tampa's description at that time and date. One hundred-fifteen people, including 111 Coast Guardsmen and four Navy men, perished that evening. The distinguished record of the officers and crew of the Tampa is most heartily commended and is in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Coast Guard. Mr. Charles Henry Klingelhoefer and the crew of the Tampa laid their lives on the altar of freedom for the benefit our nation and our way of life. On behalf of the United States Congress I would like to express my sincere appreciation for the sacrifices endured by Mr. Charles Henry Klingelhoefer and the crew of the United States Coast Guard Cutter Tampa.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life and service of Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret) Bob Lay for his distinguished service to the U.S. Army and his nation. Colonel Lay honorably served his country for thirty-one years. After an Army career as a helicopter pilot in which Colonel Lay served three tours in Vietnam, he retired from the United States Army in August 1994. During his last assignment, while serving as the Commander of the United States Army Readiness Group, at Patrick Air Force Base, he also served as the Department of Defense Coordinating Officer responsible for coordination of all disaster response and recovery missions assigned to the Department of Defense in wildfires in Georgia and in Hurricane Andrew in south Florida. He also served as the manager of the Disaster Field Office in Albany, Georgia, during the floods of 1994. Bob served as the Director of Brevard County Emergency Management from April 1997 until his death on January 11, 2012. I applaud his commitment to our community, military and the future of our Armed Services. Former Governor Lawton Chiles appointed Lay to the Governor's Wildfire Response and Mitigation Review Committee following wildfires in 1998, and he represented the Central Florida Region as Emergency Management Co-Chair for Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force since 1999. He served on the Regional Local Emergency Planning Committee and on the Joint Toxic Hazard Control Team representing the public surrounding Kennedy Space Center and Canaveral Air Force Station. He was instrumental in establishing unity of effort as a regionalization of resources within the Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force area. Lay was recognized by the Florida Emergency Preparedness Association as the Emergency Management Professional of the Year for 2003 and received a Distinguished Service Award from the National Hurricane Conference in 2004 for outstanding leadership in response to hurricanes Charlie, Frances and Jeanne. Bob was the President of Ascension Lutheran Church's Congregational Council and served on the Board of Directors of the Community Services Council and the Eastern Florida Maritime Area Security Committee, as well as representing Emergency Management on FEMA's National Advisory Council. Bob is survived by his wife, Patti, two sons, a daughter and three grandchildren. This is a sudden and tragic loss for our community. Bob was a great guy, a true leader and someone who we all relied on to get us through the hurricanes, storms and other devastating events. He was calm in a crisis, cool under pressure and there was not a challenge Bob wasn't ready to face. Bob embodied the true meaning of public service. ``Bob has been an absolute rock for many, many years,'' said Brevard County Sheriff Jack Parker. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends that knew and loved him. I am honored to rise in support of Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret) Bob Lay's service to our nation, and I am proud of his commitment to the cause of liberty, freedom and public service.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, as an elected Representative from one of the states hardest hit by the financial crisis, I strongly support H.R. 2056, introduced by my colleague, Representative Lynn Westmoreland, which takes a closer look at how our Nation's small community banks are failing at the hands of overzealous regulators. H.R. 2056 directs the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Government Accountability Office to study whether certain practices and procedures employed by federal regulators while examining financial institutions has played a role in a record number of community banks failing in recent years. Among these are important issues relating to loss-sharing agreements and examiners' policies relating to appraisals. Among other things, the FDIC must determine whether financial institutions are being placed into receivership or conservatorship due to significant losses arising from loans for which all payments were made on time and the contractual terms of the loans have been met. With Congressman Westmoreland, I believe that a performing loan is exactly that--one that is performing according to the terms of the contract. A regulator should not be able to step in and interject an opinion on why the loan may not perform at some point in the future, and thus penalize a community bank. The introduction and passage of this bill indicates that there is a real world problem here, one that deserves swift diagnosis and treatment. I have heard from bankers time and again that regulators have shifted away from considering objective evaluations of loan performance, such as borrower payment history, and looked instead to subjective opinions on whether a loan may experience difficulties in the future. No business can thrive in that kind of volatile environment. Community banks are struggling in Florida. To make matters worse, surviving banks are operating in fear of overzealous regulators and as a result, small businesses are finding it almost impossible to obtain the capital they need to expand and hire more workers. Community banks are the lifeblood of our local communities and are best positioned to help our economy recover if they are able to make loans, using reasonable underwriting standards, without being penalized by their examiners. It has been shown that states with the highest number of bank failures also have the highest unemployment and foreclosure rates in the country. That being said, it will be difficult to realize a full national economic recovery without addressing the issue of why so many small banks are closing their doors and why so many of them are unable to make loans in their community. As Congress continues to work to see that our economy recovers, it is essential that we press regulators for answers to the issues raised in Representative Westmoreland's study. No one wants to see a repeat of what transpired in 2008 and the effects that still linger on today. However, we must remember that small banks did not cause the financial crisis. Their business practices are by nature thorough and cautious. I urge my colleagues to take a serious look at the issues raised by Representative Westmoreland and join me in pressing financial regulators for answers.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life and service of Jeremiah Thor Sancho, a Specialist with the United States Army, who laid down his life for our freedoms on October 13, 2011, while performing his duties in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan, in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Mr. Sancho was a JRROTC Member and 2006 Graduate of Palm Bay High School, who honorably served his country as a member of the A Troop, 3rd Squadron, 71st Calvary Regiment, 10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, New York. Mr. Sancho's military decorations include: The Purple Heart, Bronze Star, Afghanistan Campaign Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the Army Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, Combat Action Badge, and the National Defense Medal. Jeremiah, or ``Jerry'' as he was better known to friends and loved ones, is survived by his wife, RaiAnne Sancho; his loving parents Janet and Bernardo Diaz; Sister, Jaell Diaz; Brothers Bernardo ``E.J.'' Diaz, Jovon A. Diaz; Aunt, Darlene Caraballo; Uncle, Edward Anthony Izquierdo; Grand Parents, Edward Izquierdo, Enrique Diaz, Gary and Jeannie Boyer; Mother-in-law, Sharon Bocco; Father-in-law, Joe Bocco; Brother-in-law, Joseph Bocco; Sister-in-law, Catherine Bocco; and many more friends and family members. Several hundred people attended the memorial service that was conducted at the First Baptist Church of Melbourne in Melbourne, Florida on October 28, 2011. Jerry will be remembered by those who admired him as a fun loving, avid comic-book fan, gamer, and budding artist. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends. There's no greater honor than to lay your life down for another. Jeremiah T Sancho paid the ultimate sacrifice and we'll always remember him for that. We've lost another great American, and he will be truly missed. Jerry is a true hero.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Well, first I will comment on the value of buying homes on credit. I think it's a pretty good idea; but when you go to get qualified for a home, the rule of thumb is that you should buy a home roughly not more than 2.5 times your annual income. If you compare that to our known debt of $15 trillion, our revenues of about $2.2 trillion, you would see that if our debt was a home loan, it would be 14 times our annual income. No lender would loan you money under those circumstances; they would say you are bankrupt far beyond any possibility of recovering. And that doesn't include the $60 trillion unfunded liabilities for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. So I don't know if that was really a very good analogy. Now, to my point, there is an old political axiom that says that anytime you promise to steal from Peter to pay Paul, one thing usually happens: Paul votes for you. Total revenues, as I just said in answer to the chairman's question, are about $2.2 trillion; total expenses the Federal Government spends, $3.6 trillion. Where does the money come from? Rather than balancing our budget like every hardworking American family, 49 other States, and virtually every local government in the country, Congress instead currently puts about 40 percent of every what has been described as ``vote-buying'' dollar it spends on our kids' and our grandkids' credit cards, to the point where each American family's share of the national debt is about $125,000--actually, in excess of $125,000. It will be hard to stop the spending. It will be like taking drugs away from an addict. Since Congress--Republicans and Democrats--has not shown the political will to be accountable, I believe a voter-mandated, balanced budget constitutional amendment is the only hope this country has to preserve the American experiment at representative self-government. And I urge Members of this body to begin thinking about the next generation instead of the next election.

Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, nearly every State in the union is required to balance its budget each year, including my home State of Florida. Our counties, cities, school boards and special districts are all required to make financially responsible decisions with the hard-earned tax dollars of Florida's working families and small businesses. It is long past due for Washington to do the same, which is why the Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is one of the first bills I cosponsored as a new Member of Congress in 2009. For 235 years, the United States has been the greatest economic success story the world has ever known. Yet, the most significant threat ever to our continued success is our unprecedented and rapidly growing national debt. From 1776 to 2008, Washington accumulated a debt of $10.6 trillion. Yet in just the last 3 years alone, another $4.4 trillion in debt has been added for a grand total of $15 trillion and counting. Washington doesn't just have a spending problem. It has an insatiable addiction to spending money it does not have and it is threatening our children's future. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff called it the greatest threat to our Nation. The last time the House voted on and passed a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution--back in 1997--the national debt stood at $5.4 trillion. That year the Balanced Budget Amendment fell just ONE VOTE short of passage in the Senate. It's something I like to call ``The Ten Trillion Dollar Vote.'' So, you might ask: How do these gigantic numbers relate to the American taxpayer? Because of Washington's failure to control spending, each and every taxpayer's share of the debt amounts to $130,000. It gets worse. On our current path, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the national debt will reach $23 TRILLION in 2015. That's $200,000 in debt per taxpayer. This must change. The American people were promised in 1997 that Washington would balance the budget without a Balanced Budget Amendment. Given what we now know, it's ridiculous to believe that Washington will balance the budget and begin paying down the debt without the requirement of a Balanced Budget Amendment. Future generations of Americans deserve to live with the same opportunities we have had. Burdening them with this unprecedented debt load is immoral and unthinkable. Only by passing a Balanced Budget Amendment can we eliminate their greatest threat to success and guarantee them the same opportunities that we have had. I urge my colleagues to support the Balanced Budget Amendment and set our Nation on a more financially responsible and stable course.

Mr. BILL POSEY

Mr. BILL POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I am a cosponsor of H.R. 674, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the imposition of 3 percent withholding on certain payments made to vendors by government entities. I supported passage of the bill in the House of Representatives on October 27 and again, with Senate amendments, on November 16. I was also a cosponsor of similar legislation (H.R. 275) in the 111th Congress. Although I was on the House floor and voting on November 16, my vote was not recorded for H.R. 674. I would like for the record to read that I should have been recorded as a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. POSEY

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

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chair, I filed an amendment to the 2012 Department of the Interior appropriations bill that would provide a 25-mile buffer along Florida's coast to ensure that new oil and gas drilling would not take place above the Outer Continental Shelf within 25 miles of Florida's coast line. After reviewing the Interior bill and current drilling policies in the Atlantic and the Gulf, I have decided to hold off offering the amendment on the floor for this particular bill, which covers only the next fiscal year. There is not an imminent threat of drilling near Florida's coast due to current restrictions on leasing and drilling. That said, going forward, I look forward to working with my colleagues in the future to tap more of our own domestic energy resources while taking common sense steps to preserve Florida's tourism economy. It is important to note, as the amendment is drafted, that directional drilling within 25 miles would still be allowed. The amendment make no changes--zero, nada, zilch--to the Gulf moratorium that is in place, or the Department of the Interior's current lease plans in the Atlantic. Tourism is Florida's number one industry. My amendment would ensure that beach tourism is not harmed. Obviously, neither you nor your constituents would prefer seeing a drilling platform in lieu of a sunrise. Just as fuel is important to our economy, so. are our beaches. The amendment encourages the best possible stewardship of both, while protecting beach goers' line of sight, and preserving the scenic vistas that tourists come to Florida to enjoy. Getting Florida's economy turned around is important. Our economy has already been harmed by the end of the Space Shuttle program. Agriculture, construction, and housing sectors continue to struggle. Preserving a 25-mile buffer would send a message to visitors, nationwide and worldwide, that we are protecting the pristine nature of our shores that have traditionally drawn hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. It says to millions of tourists that we remain open for their tourism business now and into the future. Preserving a 25-mile buffer would be an important step toward ensuring that tourism, a bright and recovering sector of our economy, which brings an enormous amount of foreign dollars and tax revenue into the United States, continues to recover. Again, this amendment would pertain only to drilling above the Outer Continental Shelf. Directional drilling within 25 miles would still be allowed. I hope all of my colleagues would support this or a similar amendment in future legislation. This issue is ultimately important to every member of this House. I look forward to you, and your constituents, visiting our wonderful beaches. They are some of the best in the world, and--with your help-- they will remain that way.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, today is a bittersweet day for Florida's Space Coast, for the space program, and for the Nation. As Atlantis touched down at 5:57 a.m. today, July 21, 2011, at Kennedy Space Center, another era of exploration closed. Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral have been the center of America's human space flight program since its inception. Nearly every manned mission has launched from Florida's Space Coast. The Shuttle program is no different. Every Shuttle mission has been processed, assembled, and launched by the talented and dedicated men and women at Kennedy Space Center. Just as Kennedy Space Center has been an important part of the Shuttle Program, the Shuttle Program has been an essential part of Florida's identity, so much so that it was featured on our State's quarter. From the rumble of the Shuttle lifting off, to the sonic boom felt as the Shuttle traverses Florida on its way to land at Kennedy after another accomplished mission, the Shuttle is a part of Central Florida's culture. Space Coast residents have cheered the successes the Shuttle Program has seen in its 30 years of service to our Nation: ferrying astronauts, modules, components, and experiments to the International Space Station; launching and repairing numerous satellites including the Hubble; launching three interplanetary probes; and advancing scientific experimentation including microgravity research. After all, the citizens of the Space Coast working at Kennedy Space Center helped make these successes possible. Our community grieved deeply when, as President Ronald Reagan said, the Challenger astronauts ``slipped the surly bonds of this Earth,'' to ``touch the face of God,'' on January 28, 1986, and when the Shuttle Columbia failed to make it home on February 1, 2003. The entire Nation wept for the loss of these heroes, but the Space Coast mourned these brave men and women as family. As we welcome Atlantis home for the last time, I would especially like to applaud all of our Shuttle workers from United Space Alliance and other contractors who did the work necessary to keep the Shuttles flying for 30 great years. It is their hard work and dedication that made these missions possible. Our heartfelt gratitude goes out to each and every one of them on this historic, but bittersweet day.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to my colleagues' attention the celebration taking place in Osceola County, Florida, later this month. More specifically, on July 24, 2011, the Committee Desfile Puertorriqueno de Osceola, Inc., has chosen to dedicate the First Annual Puerto Rican Day Parade to commemorate the heroism of the U.S. Army's 65th Infantry Regiment, better known as ``The Borinqueneers.'' I rise today to join them in this recognition as we come together to celebrate the Borinqueneers, their commitment to the liberties of the United States, and their specific military achievements on the front line of the battlefield in advancing the values upon which this nation was founded. On March 2, 1899, Congress authorized the establishment of the Army unit that became known as the ``The Borinqueneers,'' an all-volunteer Puerto Rican unit. This brave unit was called upon to serve in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War and fought valiantly under the motto ``Honor et Fidelitas,'' meaning Honor and Fidelity. When ``The Borinqueneers'' were called to the front lines during the Korean War, General MacArthur said of the unit, ``The Puerto Ricans forming the ranks of the gallant 65th Infantry on the battlefields of Korea . . . are writing a brilliant record of achievement in battle and I am proud indeed to have them in this command. I wish that we might have more like them.'' The Borinqueneers consistently demonstrated exceptional and unyielding valor on the battlefield despite the hardships they endured. As a unit, they earned a Presidential Unit Citation, a Meritorious Unit Commendation and two Republic of Korea Unit Citations. Individuals within the regiment were also awarded Distinguished Service Crosses, Silver Stars and Bronze Stars. I am honored to pay tribute to the service that ``The Borinqueneers'' have provided our nation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this opportunity to pay tribute to these fine soldiers.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill that directs the Secretary of Defense to utilize to the fullest extent practicable the incredible resource that exists at the NASA Shuttle Logistics Depot, NSLD, in Central Florida. The Department of Defense would be well served to make greater use of the facility's unique manufacturing capabilities and highly-skilled workforce for Department of Defense supply chain and repair needs. The loss of this facility and its workforce would not only be a blow to our nation's space program but represent a missed opportunity to serve U.S. national security interests. The unique combination of technologically-advanced equipment used in the 300,000 sq. ft. NSLD facility for aerospace manufacturing, repair, and overhaul combined with the critical workforce is extremely capable of providing warfighter support for our military. Although the NSLD's operator, the United Space Alliance, USA, has procured a recent DLA contract, the work is not enough to maintain the NSLD. This irreplaceable workforce will go elsewhere once the Shuttle Program comes to an end. The skills the NSLD facility and personnel offer are a direct match to those the DoD needs to reduce the risk of vanishing vendors and diminishing manufacturing sources in its supply chain. USA's performance-based logistics operations have maintained on- time delivery greater than 98 percent, and a customer acceptance rate of 99.99 percent. USA has managed NASA assets of 250,000 unique part numbers valued at $1.5 billion per year. During the Shuttle Program, over 80 OEM hardware repair or manufacturing tasks--260 Orbiter Line Replaceable Units comprised of over 7,000 line items--were transitioned to and certified by USA at the NSLD. By Shuttle Program end, more than 80 percent of all completed Orbiter Line Replaceable Unit repairs were done at NSLD by USA resources. This Amendment is directly tied to jobs. The final flight of the Space Shuttle Orbiter, scheduled for Friday, sets the stage for a mass exodus of highly skilled labor and specialized resources from Florida's Space Coast. This void will further strain our economy and dilute the workforce and capabilities needed to sustain the technologies required to achieve the diversification of Florida's economy. Aside from being a great asset to the Department of Defense, greater utilization of this important asset will keep the facility functioning as we look to NASA's next mission. This workforce would have been sustained as NASA transitioned to the Constellation Program, that is before it was vitiated. The retirement of the Shuttle Program presents an excellent opportunity for the Department of Defense, the Defense Logistics Agency specifically, to take advantage of the highly skilled workforce as they process and refurbish equipment returning from theater in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is an opportunity which can preserve a national asset, preserve jobs, and assist the Department of Defense in cycling through the equipment returning from combat. And so, Mr. Speaker, I am submitting this amendment to encourage DoD to make better use of this rich resource so that it does not winnow away.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, Congressman Webster and I were walking past the rear of the Chamber, and we looked at each other kind of funny after some former comments and thought we were walking by a set for comedy hour. I mean, I think I really heard somebody allude to the fact that we need more government regulation and for sure we need more taxes on the oil companies, those evil oil companies, and the answer to all of our problems is to tax them more--as if the Members of this body and the public are stupid enough to think that at the end of the year, those big oil companies are just going to write a check for an extra zillion dollars. Let's say we tax those evil oil companies another dollar a gallon. They're not going to write the check. We know what's going to happen: They're going to raise the price a dollar a gallon, or, given the corporate greed we sometimes see, round it off to 2 bucks a gallon. Corporations don't pay taxes. Corporations collect taxes. They collect taxes from consumers who ultimately pay the tax. You add a tax to a product, and the consumer is going to pay more.

Mr. POSEY. I wish we would, as the gentleman from Texas said, quit trying to play ``Pin the Tail on the Donkey.'' We know corporations don't pay taxes. Consumers pay taxes; corporations just collect it.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act. As you know, this bill would terminate the failed Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), while still protecting assistance for homeowners who were already extended an offer to participate in the program. If passed, it would save taxpayers $1.4 billion. HAMP was established under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) and was aimed at helping homeowners modify their loans. The Administration rolled out HAMP with the goal of assisting three to four million homeowners, yet the program has fallen far short of that goal, assisting only 500,000 borrowers and at a cost much higher than anticipated. In fact, this program is hurting more homeowners than it is helping. Many trial modifications ultimately end up being cancelled--putting borrowers in a worse financial position than they were before they applied for HAMP assistance. Too many found HAMP to be less than helpful, and ended up owing back payments, interest, and fees in one lump sum once their modification request is rejected. Numerous government watchdogs--including the Government Accountability Office, the Special Inspector General for TARP, and the Congressional Oversight Panel--are all on record labeling HAMP as ineffective. Unfortunately, as I've witnessed in Financial Services Committee hearings and on the House floor, the Administration has been unwilling to accept these objective analyses and terminate the program, instead choosing to throw good money after bad. I believe when we see valuable tax dollars being spent on a flawed program we must terminate those programs. A dollar saved here is one less dollar borrowed and put on the tab of future generations. Washington is on an unsustainable path. Out-of-control government spending has caused a massive increase in borrowing and the national debt is now a record $14 trillion. Facing a $1.5 trillion deficit for the third year in a row, the time is past due for Washington to make tough decisions so that our nation's financial future will be secure. All across America, families are doing more with less, and it is time for Washington to do likewise. Fiscally responsible Americans know the budgetary challenges we face and are supportive of the steps we are taking to stop the waste. Mr. Chair and my colleagues, I ask that you join me in support of H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act. Together, let's stand with the American people and get Washington's spending spree under control.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life and service of Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.) Chester L. Rice for his distinguished service to the U.S. Army and his nation. LTC Rice honorably served his country for twenty-one years from 1955 to 1976. Chester served as a member of my Service Academy Nominating Committee since 2009. He also served as a member of Congressman Weldon's Service Academy Nominating Committee from 1997 to 2008. I applaud his commitment to our youth, military and the future of our Armed Services. On May 15, 2001, Chester was awarded the TROACC Award from the Cape Canaveral Chapter of the Retired Officers Association for his leadership and dedicated work as Vice President and President of TROACC. Under his direction, the Chapter was twice selected as the TROA Chapter of the Year and the chapter magazine, the Intercom, was twice selected as the best in its category. LTC Rice served as Chairman of the TROACC Student Affairs Committee and is credited for improvements to the program, which recognizes outstanding cadets from the Junior ROTC Programs in eleven Brevard County High Schools and from the ROTC Panther Battalion at the Florida Institute of Technology. The excellent support that TROACC provided to these Junior and Senior ROTC programs is a direct result of the leadership and dedicated work of LTC Rice. Born in Lawrenceville, Virginia on Nov. 28, 1933, he attended high school in Derry Township, Pennsylvania and was President of his high school class all four years. All his classmates loved him. His awards and decorations include the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal and the Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster. Chester is survived by his wife, Helen and brother, Donald Rice. He was preceded in death by his brothers, Harry Rice and Robert Rice, Jr. and his sister, Dolores Henderson. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends. I am honored to rise and call attention to the service that Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.) Chester L. Rice has provided our nation. I am proud to have known him and to see his commitment to the cause of liberty and freedom.

Mr. POSEY

Mr. POSEY. I thank the gentleman from Texas for recognizing me. I didn't plan to speak today. But I was in my office and I was listening to your explanation of this abhorrent and out of control administrative rules process, where people who are not elected and are not accountable make up the rules as they go along however they may want them to. We have had a number of cases that have injured my constituents, or at least caused them a lot of sleepless nights already. As you may know, sir, earlier this year the Securities and Exchange Commission exposed their intent now to examine the entities that they regulate not just based on their conformance with securities law, but on their environmental stewardship. Now, these are the same people that couldn't put Bernard Madoff away when they were given an open and shut case 10 years before Madoff basically turned himself in. This is the same agency that hasn't disciplined anybody. Nobody's been reprimanded. Nobody's had their wrist slapped. Nobody's had a day off yet. They can't do the job they are supposed to do now, but they're going to start regulating companies for their environmental stewardship based upon rules that they promulgated. And you're correct that's the wrong thing to do. Most recently, and near and dear to my heart because it affects so many people in my State, is the new rule the IRS has proposed to deal with banks and foreign deposits. You know, for over 90 years this country has encouraged foreign investors to put their money in our banks. It makes good sense. We have their money, we can loan it out, it creates jobs for Americans. It's a win-win situation. It's a win for them, it's a win for us. Now, the IRS has decided that they're going to promulgate a rule that says the banks must notify the governments of every foreign depositor regarding how much money they have in our banks. Now, what's the benefit to the United States for that? There is no benefit to the United States. They don't owe taxes in the United States. What's the liability to the United States for that? The liability is that $200 billion to $400 billion will leave American banks and go back into foreign banks. Now, can you imagine if you were unfortunate enough to be governed by Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, or Castro what would happen if they found out that you had assets in the United States of America? You would not only lose your assets; you might lose your life. But more importantly, this wrong-headed rule would cause a dramatic de-stimulus effect on our economy when you look at a stimulus bill of $800 billion that basically didn't perform like it was supposed to. It doesn't make much sense to write a rule that would take $200 billion to $400 billion, up to as much as 50 percent of what our stimulus bill was, out of our economy. The IRS tried to do this about 10 years ago. Over 100 Members of Congress stepped up and said this is a lousy idea, and it needs to be defeated. So my plea today, sir, is that we can have at least 100 Members of this Congress that will again stand up and say this was a bad idea 10 years ago, it's a bad idea now. Let's kill this rule and don't let it happen.

Mr. POSEY. I thank the gentleman again. You know, many people, even elected people aren't really familiar with what exactly an administrative rule is. We talk about these administrative rules as rules, and people wonder what they are. I used to explain to people that in Florida, where I first got interested in the administrative rule process, all the laws on the books passed by their elected State officials were in four law books this big. They were shocked by that. They said, well, what about the commercials where we see the attorney in front of all the books advertising for Dewey, Cheatem and Howe? What are all those? Aren't those our State's laws? Yeah, that's last year's edition and the edition before that, and the interpretations of them. But all those rules are in those four books. They are shocked at that. They said, well, we thought there were a lot more laws than that. I would say, well, there are a lot more laws than that, but those are all the laws that were made by people you elect. The administrative rules are laws which are made by unelected people that you don't vote for. And usually, they could fill up half the room. They would probably fill out a quarter of this room. So that's what most people don't understand, the relatively few laws that are passed by people they elect, and the plethora of rules that are passed by people they don't elect. I remember it's one of the reasons I ran for the State legislature. I had promised my wife when I got off the city council I'd never run for office again as long as I lived. She made me promise her. That changed, and one of the reasons was I was upset by the runaway proliferation of rules in that State, which seemed like they were making rules willy- nilly that were causing an inconvenience for every business and putting jobs in danger. So I got elected and, Judge, you know, the first bill I passed made it a third-degree misdemeanor for a bureaucrat to promulgate a rule that wasn't authorized by statute. Of course, people thought I was crazy. A lot of the media made fun of me, and I was the brunt of a lot of jokes. The Governor at the time had a hit squad go after that bill, and when I had it come up in committee they went around and met every member and said, Kill this bill. But it still got out of committee. So they referred it to six more committees, and we weren't able to advance that. I struggled with trying to change the way the administrative laws are promulgated and come up with a system for about 4 years, to no avail. Representative Simler, Representative Pruitt were doing the same thing, and it just seemed like we were getting nowhere. And then in the 4th year, the Governor that had previously seemed so disgruntled with my legislation gave his final State of the State address wearing one of these belts like they wear at Walmart or Home Depot or Lowe's so you don't hurt yourself, and he was holding all the rules that applied to a cook shack that he wanted to build on Chemonie Plantation. And he said, We have got to do something about this out-of-control rules process. And he gave every member of the House and every State senator at the time a copy of a book by Philip Howard called, ``The Death of Common Sense.'' It is a great book that I implore people to read. It is very short and it is an easy read. It talks about how the rules process has worked to harm society. You know, Mother Teresa at one time wanted to have a house for the homeless in New York City. She located the perfect spot, got the contractors ready, was ready to open the doors, but the building department said, No, you can't do that here. She said, Why? Because that building does not have enough restrooms. So we have to continue to let the people sleep on the sidewalks and use the street for a restroom because of the rigid, monolithic interpretation of the laws and the rules. So, as a result, finally, of his personal experience, the Governor said, We need to change rules, the rules procedure, and we did. And you know, we changed the way rules are vetted. There's a joint administrative procedure committee which reviews every rule to make sure there's specific statutory authority to write that rule. The new process wasn't in order very long before one of the State agencies determined that any land with a new type of fern or fauna on it should be considered a wetland and couldn't be used for any development. Fortunately, it impacted a very large landowner down there who challenged the rule through an investigative court, an administrative rule through an administrative judge. The administrative judge ruled in favor of the bureaucrats, saying the legislature could not possibly have meant exactly what they said. That was the crux of their 38-page decision. So the next year we passed House Bill 107, which basically said we mean unequivocally exactly what we said, and from a rules perspective the State has lived happily ever after. Now, Washington is more dysfunctional than I anticipated that it would be when I got here, and one of the worst dysfunctions is the administrative procedures or the administrative rules process here. It's shocking that it's a very old process built on a flimsy foundation. There have been numerous attempts to fix it. None of them have been really successful, and I think, as you and I have discussed before, we need to have total reform. We need to start with a clean sheet of paper, and we need to make the agencies accountable for the rules they write, and they need to be specifically statutorily authorized to do those things. And so I hope that our colleagues will join with us as we move forward trying to seek an accountability and an efficiency in our government that is greatly lacking right now but is within our grasp.