Tom Reed

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to respond to my colleague on the other side of the aisle who just spoke in regard to when it comes to unemployment benefit extensions. What we have to do, in my opinion, is set the framework upon which jobs in America could be created. We just had an example of this last week. I so hope our President tonight in this very Chamber comes and explains his decision to reject American jobs being created through the Keystone pipeline, because there is a project that has been identified; and it will be implemented in a way that would create an immediate 20,000 new jobs for men and women in America. That will go a long way to solving our unemployment problems in the United States, not just extending unemployment benefits. But as we take up the issue of extending unemployment benefits, we need to do better. We owe it to hardworking taxpayers of America to come up with solutions and reforms in our unemployment benefits programs that give them the tools, the resources to be reemployed. I agree wholeheartedly with my colleague on the other side of the aisle that I don't believe the majority of Americans wants to be unemployed. They want to get back to work. So in our reforms that were passed in this Chamber before the end of the year, we talk about such things as requiring GEDs, high school education equivalency diplomas, high school degrees so that people could have that basic educational benefit that will give them the tools to get back to work. We should be focusing together in a bipartisan manner, Democrat and Republican, on reforms that are going to give those tools to our unemployed Americans rather than just giving a check. There is an old adage that I grew up with, being the youngest of 12 children, that was passed on for generations in our family, which was: You give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. You teach a man or woman to fish, you feed him and her and their entire family for a lifetime. That is the mantra. That is the foundation upon which we should take up unemployment extension in this conference and join hands to implement going forward. Again, I have to highlight the fact that what we see out of the other Chamber in the United States Senate is a willingness to just achieve what is politically possible, to only achieve what could be called a political win. It is time to stop focusing on politics. Hardworking taxpayers in America deserve us to focus on good policy. Mr. Speaker, with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in great agreement with my colleague from California on the other side of the aisle. What she has articulated before us in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, is an instruction to the conferees, of which I am one, to get our job done. I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. Also, there is a tremendous amount of agreement when it comes to the payroll tax extension to get an extension for at least a year, to extend unemployment benefits, and also to do what we have to do in Washington, D.C., in regards to our providers under Medicare with our doc fix. We have proposed and passed in this Chamber before the end of the year a 1-year proposal on the payroll tax extension fully paid for, a 2-year proposal on our doc fix fully paid for. Those are long-term solutions that have been offered by our side of the aisle, adopted in a bipartisan fashion before the end of the year, and sent to the Senate to act upon. The reality of the situation finds us in a position where the Senate has not done its job. And my colleague from California is correct. A lot of it had to do with the fact that the Senate ran out of time, and they reverted to classic, old political ways of doing business: passing legislation at 3 o'clock, 2 o'clock in the morning, waiting until the last minute, and putting forth a product that only allowed us to kick the can 2 months down the road. We can do better. We need to do better. The proposal that came out of this Chamber was a start in that right direction. It is time that we join together and we hit this long-term solution put forth for the American people because they deserve no less. I would be remiss if we did not identify the fact that we as conferees were here over the Christmas break. We were here trying to champion the cause for making sure we put policy into law, not achieve political gamesmanship or wins. It is time for us to focus on policy and put politics aside. Hardworking taxpayers deserve that today in America. I, for one, will join my colleague on the other side of the aisle in the tremendous amount of agreement that I think we have going into this conference and the sentiment of getting the job done in time, not waiting until the last minute, coming up with a long-term solution of at least a year on our payroll tax extension, at least 2 years for our doctors who are getting reimbursed under Medicare, and take care of the unemployment situation. But I would have to disagree with my colleague on the other side of the aisle when she says that unemployment benefits are some sort of economic stimulus that should be expanded. I understand, and I have read what the economists have said on the economic impact of unemployment benefits. My point would be, if that logic were true, then why don't we just extend unemployment benefits to every American and sit back and watch the economy blossom. The fundamental truth is--and it's time to be open and honest with the American people about it--that the economy is not going to strengthen based on government expansion, government spending. It's going to strengthen on a commitment to small-business America laying the foundation upon which the private sector knows that there is certainty, there is confidence in the market, and they have the ability to know what the rules are going to be for years to come, not on a month-by-month basis. I urge my colleagues in the other Chamber, in the U.S. Senate, to heed that fundamental message. We can no longer, in Washington, D.C., believe that short-term policy is the best we can do for America. Hardworking taxpayers deserve better than that, and small business owners across America need to know what the rules are with certainty and for years so that they can make the investments to put our hardworking taxpayer Americans back to work. That's what we stand for on this side of the aisle; and that is what I am hopeful, going into this conference, we will be able to produce out of this payroll bill, unemployment extension, and our doc fix. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Commuter Protection Act, of which I am proud to be an original cosponsor. This bipartisan, responsible legislation brings oversight of our nation's federally funded highway system back to the United States Department of Transportation, giving them the ability to determine whether tolls imposed by regional and state toll authorities are just and reasonable. This was an authority the Department of Transportation had previously, and one I believe should be restored. Importantly, they would only have oversight when, and if, there was a complaint about a toll practice. Representing the 29th Congressional District of the great state of New York, this is an issue that impacts my constituents directly. Recent actions taken by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey are indicative of the abusive toll structure that can be imposed when agencies are left unchecked. The Port Authority recently raised toll rates for all of its bridges and tunnels, which, when fully implemented, will charge 5-axle tractor-semitrailers $105 per crossing. Mister Speaker, this is a 163% cost jump, with rates three times higher than Philadelphia, the next highest city for tolls on trucks. Mr. Speaker, a toll increase like this has a tremendously negative impact on my constituents who transport goods in and out of New York City. I have heard directly from many of them, like Ken Johnson who owns Leonards Express, a trucking company in Ontario County, about the harm this would do for his business and others throughout Western New York and the Southern Tier. Additionally, it is clear that ultimately consumers will bear the burden of paying higher prices for goods they buy in stores. While I understand making needed safety improvements to our nation's roads necessitates increasing tolls from time to time, I do not understand--nor has the Port Authority given--the justification for a rise of this magnitude. Thus, we need the Department of Transportation to be able to review these toll structures, and others across the country, to ensure taxpayer interests are being best served. Consumers and businesses should not be forced to pay the price for mismanagement, and that is why I urge my colleagues to support the Commuter Protection Act.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise today with a few of my colleagues to talk about an issue that, I think, could be a game-changer for the United States of America, which is the natural gas development potential that we find in the shale formations throughout the United States. I have been privileged to cofound the Marcellus Shale Caucus here in the U.S. House of Representatives with my colleague from Pennsylvania, Mark Critz, who will be joining us shortly. The purpose of the caucus is to come at this issue from an objective, scientific, database point of view in order to talk about the pros and cons of natural gas development in America and, in particular, of the Marcellus shale formation, which is located in my district of western New York, throughout Pennsylvania, and in other areas of the Northeast. One of the things we wanted to highlight today is the indirect benefits that natural gas development will have on our country and probably most importantly from an economic point of view at this time when we face in our Nation's history some of the most enduring and high levels of unemployment we have ever seen. What we are fundamentally talking about are jobs, not only the jobs related to extracting the natural gas, itself, and laying the pipeline to transport that natural gas to its markets, but the jobs that come as a result of the indirect benefits of that natural gas production. What I and my colleagues are, hopefully, going to talk about tonight are things like the benefits to the public local municipalities with regard to the tax base, road construction and the improvements of the road structures that are located within the areas upon which natural gas development is occurring as a result of the shale formations. Through these conversations, I think that we will be able to establish that the benefits of extracting natural gas in America will be that game-changing event when it comes to domestic supplies of energy that come from American sources--an event we have never seen before in our lifetimes or potentially in the lifetimes of our children. So I would like to preface this entire conversation by laying some preliminary remarks based upon some concerns that have been raised as to natural gas development in America. I travel my district. I go to many town hall meetings and get out in front of the people. At times, this issue can become sensitive in the sense of the environmental concerns that are raised. I have always taken the position that this issue should only be dealt with when we can establish that natural gas exploration and development in America can be done in a safe, clean, responsible manner. That's why, tonight, I am going to read some quotes to you, Mr. Speaker, and to those who may be tuning in and watching this conversation, because there has been a lot of discussion about the potential threat to our aquifers and to our water supplies as a result of hydrofracking and natural gas development out of the shale and tight sand formations. For the record, I would just like to quote some of our leading environmental government officials in America: ``When it comes to natural gas development, the key is to make sure that we say, 'Engineers, make sure we do it safely, without harming water supplies,' and I think we're well on the way. On chemicals, we don't have data that shows those chemicals showing up in someone's well. Over time, that may not be a true statement. Unless there's a problem with well construction, hydrofracking chemicals shouldn't end up in aquifers,'' Lisa Jackson, head of the EPA for the United States of America, October 14, 2011. ``I'm not aware of any proven case where the fracking process, itself, has affected water, although there are investigations ongoing,'' Lisa Jackson, Director of the Environmental Protection Agency for the United States of America, May 24, 2011. You know, these are comments coming from our EPA Director, but then there's comments like, ``With respect to hydraulic (fracturing), because it occurs so far underground, we don't know any examples of (contamination) on public lands. But it demonstrates the importance of ensuring we have wellbore integrity up and down the entire wellbore.'' That's our Interior Secretary, Kenneth Salazar, testifying to the House Natural Resources Committee on November 16, 2011. I read these quotes to tell the American people and to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the concern about the environmental impacts to our aquifers, though legitimate, I think have been fully vetted and have had a long, serious, scientific review and approach in determining that risk is not what many people in America are making it out to be. And again I reiterate my position on this matter, that we need to look at this resource through the economic opportunity that it represents to us in our districts, in our homes, but to us as a Nation. And we have to look at this economic opportunity and this natural resource potential based on making sure that it is done in a safe and reliable way, but we also have to look at it from a third point of view, and that is the national security implications of tapping this domestic supply of energy. Natural gas and oils are now being found all throughout America. They are also being found right here in the United States of America in the shale formation such as the Marcellus shale, the Utica shale formation, and also the tight sands formations that exist here in our Nation. I don't think I have to speak long or hard to the American people or to you, Mr. Speaker, to explain what impact that would have on our national security. If we can establish an energy supply such that is estimated to be under our own ground in natural gas and oil, we will not be sending millions of billions, if not trillions of dollars, to people in the Middle East who have publicly declared that we are enemy number one. I think this is good public policy to promote. On the indirect benefits, I just want to highlight three examples of people that are benefiting from this from my district. Now in New York in the 29th Congressional District, we have not had any development in the Marcellus shale on a recent basis because of the moratorium in the Department of Environmental Conservation on the State level coming up with the regulations to ensure that this is done safely and responsibly. But I have the privilege of representing a district that's just adjacent to the northern tier of Pennsylvania, adjacent to my good friend, GT Thompson of Pennsylvania, who will speak shortly, where we have had a spillover effect of economic opportunity to the district. I could talk to you about Dalrymple Holdings, it's a long, family- held company right outside of my hometown of Corning, New York, that has been involved in highway infrastructure construction in Chemung County for years and counties surrounding it. But now they've expanded beyond. The business has seen a tangible impact from the development across the border. Mr. Dalrymple has reported to me that he has undertaken contracts for total construction of 65 miles of rural roads, a value over $22 million of road construction being fully funded by private investment. Let me stress that again, Mr. Speaker, $22 million of private dollars going into road construction upon which Mr. Dalrymple and his company have benefited. Now, it's not just Mr. Dalrymple. I know this man, he's a good man, and in that $22 million worth of additional investment in his company and in the projects that it represents, he has been able to create and hire over 60 new men and women averaging $40 per hour to his business to fulfill those contracts. Those are 60 families that now benefit directly as a result of this development occurring in the northern tier of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Dalrymple and I share a common background in the sense of he's a small business owner, I was a small business owner before I came here to Congress. And I could tell you there is nothing, nothing like looking at a man or a woman when you hire them and bring them into your business, and you put them to work. When you have sat in that position, you know when you look at that person you're not just benefiting that person, that person becomes part of your family as a small business owner, and you're taking care of him or her, but you're also taking care of his family, his children by putting food on their table, by providing extra dollars for their children and their education. That is the American ideal. That's the American Dream, just to give someone the opportunity to go to work to take care of their families. And I also will bring to the record tonight a story of our local dry cleaning company. I could not believe it, Mr. Speaker. I went over to pick up the family dry cleaning, and I was talking to Rick over in Painted Post, New York, just adjacent to my hometown of Corning. And he said, Tom, come back here, I want to show you something. And we went into his back room and he showed me piles of uniforms that were used by industrial workers, by the workers on the fields in the northern tier of Pennsylvania. He related to me that he was adding an additional $5,000-plus revenue to his business coffers every month. He talked about how he was able to give bonuses to his employees because of that new opportunity. He was another small business owner that knew what it was to take care of not only his employees, but their families and to have them share in the rewards of the hard work that they put together in that dry cleaning operation. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if we don't talk a little bit about the public benefits that have been brought to my attention. You know, I look to our county executive in Chemung County, adjacent to my home county of Steuben County, and I see that his county, a small geographical county, mind you, is leading New York State in sales tax growth. He's leading New York State in hotel tax revenue increases--a small county leading the great Empire State of New York by what is going on in the northern tier of Pennsylvania. And I would be remiss if I didn't tell you the story when I spent the day down in the northern tier of Pennsylvania and met with the commissioners of Bradford County and they told me about the history of their tax sales. You know these sales, Mr. Speaker, these are the sales of people who cannot pay their real property tax bill, lose their property at an auction. I've been to those auctions. I've looked at families that have lost their property because they couldn't pay the tax bill. Well, in Bradford County, I believe in my friend's district, Mr. Thompson, they used to have sales of 100, 150 parcels is my understanding. I know we have had them in Steuben County and Chemung County in New York--and guess how many parcels went up for tax sale in the last year or two? Essentially zero, maybe one or two over those 2-year periods. That is a fundamental shift in what is going on in our part of the country, and hopefully it could be shared across America. And as that one commissioner told me as we talked about some of the concerns and issues that have to be dealt with, and traffic is always a concern that is raised, he said I'd much rather see traffic lines in my home county than unemployment lines. And I, when I heard that line, I said, Doug, that is exactly what we're talking about. As a commissioner of Bradford County, you nailed it right on the head, and that we are talking about creating traffic lines of economic opportunity and development for generations of Americans rather than compounding and growing unemployment lines. And so we will come at this issue of making sure that it is a clean and safe resource that is developed, but let us focus and join hands in bringing this opportunity for America forward. My colleague from Pennsylvania has joined us. Mr. Thompson, if you would like to comment, I yield to you.

Mr. REED. And I so appreciate my colleague, and it is the sentiment, and I know our time is winding up. But one thing that also touched me. I've done a few tours in the northern tier of Pennsylvania in your district, and I've gone back on my own to go and verify information that has been presented to me. And I came back at the last, over the recess, over the holiday, I came back, and one thing struck me as I was driving home, and that's when talking about having the ability to educate their grandchildren and the children from these family farms, and I know you've had those conversations, I've had those conversations, we down here in Washington have spent billions if not trillions of dollars of public taxpayer money to try to lift people up out of despair; through the welfare society, entitlement society we have invested billions, trillions of dollars here. And look what happened based on private economic opportunity and development in the northern tier of Pennsylvania. You have generations of families that are now lifting themselves out of poverty and out of conditions that we are spending billions down here, they're doing it on their own, and I think it makes them a stronger individual in our society and it unites families for generations, and it empowers families for generations to control their own destiny. That's what the American Dream is all about. So I appreciate my colleague joining me this evening and having this conversation. And I so appreciate the invite coming to your district and your coming to my district and our continuing the efforts to educate the American people on the benefits of natural gas development in America, the benefits of Marcellus shale and through the Marcellus Shale Caucus getting the best science and information out to the American people. With that, I thank my colleague, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REED. I appreciate my colleague from Pennsylvania for joining us here this evening. If I could continue this conversation with you, I'm sure you've done what I have done on numerous times. When I have traveled home, up state Route 15, right through the heart of your district on the way home to Corning, just over the Pennsylvania border, oftentimes I would take a few moments and get off the road and kind of go into the local communities there as we filled up the car or we got a cup of coffee. Most of the time I drive with a staff member who lives in the district, and I'd say: Let's go off road a couple of miles and see what's going on. I could tell you, every time I have pulled into a gas station there, I have been reminded of the benefits of what this can be to a community in that the parking lots are full. I had to wait in line to fill up the car because there's a lot of trucks. There's a lot of workers. There are a lot of folks coming and going out of those convenient marts. And some of the most compelling stories I had, I can remember two vividly, coming down the road, pulling off at one of these gas stations and one of these convenience marts and talking to the lady behind the counter. And we did it twice. I can remember vividly saying, what does this mean to you? What's going on here? What's causing all this? Kind of playing dumb, obviously, I had an idea of what was causing it. But in both circumstances, the response was amazing. Yeah, it's not the same community. What they would say is that it wasn't the same community as when I grew up here, but, boy, everyone seems to be doing well. Everybody seems to be happy. And one lady, she expressed the conversation because she was working a side job and her husband was a contractor. And she said, my husband used to get up at 2, 3 o'clock in the morning until this came along, and they were receiving a small check, not a retirement size check as a result of this, but a nice, stable source of additional income coming into their household. And she looked at me and she said, it just kind of takes the edge off. It just kind of took the edge off at the end of the month having to pick and choose what bill they may be able to pay that month and which one they may have to put off for another 30 days. We've all been there. I know growing up in that type of family and when we first started in our private sector life, my wife and I putting our family business together and struggling. There's a lot of stress at the end of the month. Probably that's why I lost my hair and maybe why you lost your hair. But it was amazing to look that one lady in the eye who said, I just appreciate the fact that he doesn't have to get up at 2, 3 o'clock in the morning anymore, and we've got a little side income that's going to take care of their kids. That conversation you're not having in America right now in many places, but we're having it in your district. And not so much in our district in the sense because we don't have the natural gas going right now, but we've seen the positive impacts like that. And I don't know if my colleague has any similar stories to those two young ladies that I refer to.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. REED

Mr. REED. We believe we have about three or four.

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney).

Mr. REED. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Amodei).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, could I inquire as to the amount of time we have left?

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the resolution under consideration.

Mr. REED. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I'm happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Buerkle).

Mr. REED. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I would like to say to Mr. Hoyer that I have a tremendous amount of respect for him as a Member of this body. And I have joined him to support the ``Go Big'' effort. And what I would say is, by this resolution, look at what we have done on our side of the aisle. We have brought this conversation out of the back rooms. We have brought the ideas and proposals that we've heard from Mr. Blumenauer from Oregon, I believe, who talked about comprehensive tax reform, agriculture reform on the floor of this House, in front of the American people, in an open and honest manner. And what we have done on our side of the aisle is to stress that these conversations will no longer happen behind closed doors, but they will happen on the floor of this Chamber. And I'm confident, I am confident that when we come together like we are, like the foundation that we are setting in our conversations, that we are going to solve this problem. But until that solution is enacted, I will get up every day as a Member of this House to champion the cause of getting the fiscal house of Washington, DC in order, to get our reckless spending under control, and get this economy going.

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I would just remind the gentleman that what we have done on our side of the aisle is at least we have put a plan in writing by adopting and approving the budget. We're just looking. In the last 7 months we've been waiting for a plan in black and white from the White House on how we are going to get out of this national debt crisis. Not political speeches, but in black and white so that we can take it back to the American people and have an open and honest debate with them as to where we're going to prioritize our spending and how we're going to get out of this hole. That's what we're looking for, and that's what my colleague from Arizona (Mr. Flake) is talking about. We are at the point on this side of the aisle, ladies and gentlemen, of saying we don't care who's at fault. I'm at the point--Democrat, Republican, we're at $15.2 trillion, whoever is responsible for it, I could care less. What I care about are my kids--and my grandkids, who aren't even born, who aren't even on the face of this Earth--and getting our act together in Washington and getting a national plan put together so we can join arm in arm and stand with each other to deal with this issue. With that, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I thank my colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Levin, for engaging in this debate today that is so important, in my opinion, to the future of this Nation, to the future of the world, in the sense that we need to get this issue under control once and for all. The national debt is a serious threat to our very existence as a nation. You don't have to take my word for it. You can take the word of the former joint chief of staff, Admiral Mullen, who, when he was asked by the President what is the biggest threat to our national security, responded: Not a military threat, but the national debt. A fiscal threat is what jeopardizes us most in regards to our national security. When I hear that type of opinion and advice coming out of our military leaders, I am very concerned. It should send a message across the nation that this debt needs to be addressed. It doesn't necessarily just need to be addressed for the purposes of the threat it represents to our national security, but also the threat that it represents to the economic recovery that we are trying to kindle in this city across America. The national debt represents a threat to that American recovery when it comes to putting our men and women back to work because it is the cancer that is causing concern across all of small-business America and all across the private sector when they express that they don't have the confidence or certainty that Washington will take care of the problems that threaten us most. So it is time that we come up with a hard plan. My colleagues during this debate referenced the House budget as the plan that was adopted here, that somehow by voting for this resolution we contradict ourselves because we voted for that House budget because it called for an increase in the debt ceiling. I would remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that budget only passed this House. The Senate has yet to enact a budget. It will soon be 1,000 days that the Senate of the United States of America has not passed a budget. If we don't have a U.S. House and a U.S. Senate committed budget that we can rely upon to solve this issue, how can we only rely on the House budget to see us through? This resolution today sends a message to the Senate and to the Nation that the House of Representatives will remain committed to finding a solution on this issue. The second threat that it represents to our American recovery and putting men and women back to work is if our interest rates in the private sector, which are keyed upon the national debt and the interest rates that are charged for our borrowing costs as a governmental entity, if those interest rates in the private sector increase, you're not going to have the capital to invest in small-business America or in the private sector that is going to lead us out of this economic turmoil that we find ourselves in, because they won't be able to afford that capital that will build the next plant, that will build the next assembly line or build the next retail operation that will put people back to work. The bottom line is this debt touches everything across America. What we are doing with this resolution is saying we are going to deal with it, and we are going to continue to deal with it until we get a plan in place from the White House, from the U.S. Senate, and from the U.S. House that deals with it once and for all and brings certainty and competence back to the American market. Madam Speaker, it is time to lead this Nation, not hide. It is time to put our ideas in writing, debate them with the American people in an open and honest fashion, and once and for all even be willing to sacrifice our political lives to do what is right for the American people. I am committed to doing that if it means that we will save my children's generation and the generations yet to come. That's what needs to be done. That's what needs to be done, and I think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that. We know it on our side of the aisle, and our hand is open to work in a bipartisan fashion. So I am glad that I heard many comments today on the other side of the aisle showing they are committed to that also. I am confident that when we join hands, when we come together, we will solve this issue and that we will solve the economic problems we face as a Nation, because together the history of our Nation has shown that we can overcome any obstacle in America, any threat to our existence once we unite, not divide, and put forth a commonsense solution to our problems. With that, Madam Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).