Scott Rigell

Mr. RIGELL

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

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Chairman, this is a job-creating amendment. It reflects the wisdom and truly the will of the good folks of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and specifically within the great district that I have the privilege of serving and representing, the Second Congressional District of Virginia. The House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia have made it clear that they really believe we need to move forward with coastal Virginia energy. The same is true of the Virginia Senate. And just today, we received a letter of strong support from Governor McDonnell, of which I'm very grateful for his support of this amendment. It has tremendous opportunity to put folks to work. In this very Chamber, Mr. Chairman, I recall vividly our President, President Obama, saying that he was an all-of-the-above President, and I truly think I was one of the first to leap to my feet in full support. We have really failed the American people over the last many decades in moving this country toward energy independence. So I leapt to my feet. I was clapping. Yet I'm unable to reconcile what he's saying with the painful reality--and Virginia, too. There's a full moratorium on the responsible exploration and harvesting of Virginia's coastal Virginia energy. In my view, Mr. Chairman, this is a full moratorium on job creation, and that means there's a full moratorium on the tax revenues that we need for healthier schools and better roads. So this amendment is directed right at that to break through and create action where, at present, there's a full moratorium. The way the amendment works is very simple. It requires the Secretary of the Interior to include Virginia in the 5-year oil and leasing plan. My amendment requires the Secretary of the Interior to conduct Lease Sale 220 within 1 year of enactment. Again, the word that comes to my mind is ``action''--``definitive action.'' This is what the American people want. This is what the good folks of Virginia's Second Congressional District want. It helps, in part, to move us away from the dependence on countries for our oil, many of which their values are diametrically opposed to ours, and we can do this in an environmentally responsible way.

Mr. RIGELL. I will yield to the chairman.

Mr. RIGELL

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

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I believe that our duty to our country and our men and women in uniform requires us to do everything in our power to prevent sequestration. Sequestration is not a rational course correction, but instead it is a violent, sudden, and severe budget cut, the adverse consequences of which cannot be overstated. Sequestration creates undeniable havoc in production, personnel, and in contract administration. If allowed to become reality, only two groups will benefit: our Nation's enemies and the legions of lawyers who will be engaged in endless litigation against the Federal Government. To be clear, these are not the cuts often debated in reference to the President's budget. Sequestration cuts to defense are in addition to those cuts, the sum of the two, totaling nearly $1 trillion over 10 years. Now, even if one holds the view that defense spending must come down, this is not the method in any respect to accomplish that objective. My amendment allows us to avert sequestration. Specifically, the 2013 sequester is eliminated consistent with the House-passed budget, provided one of two events happen: first, reconciliation legislation required by the budget resolution is enacted; or, two, legislation offsetting, within 5 years, the cost of the fiscal year 2013 discretionary sequester and the fiscal year 2013 sequester of defense mandatory programs is enacted. It also requires a report on the impact of sequestration prior to it taking effect, which is crucial. This amendment is critical to preventing sequestration, which must be done if we are to meet our obligation to defend this great country; and the men and women who are truly defending this country are the men and women in uniform. So I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Budget Committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. RIGELL. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in strong support of the amendment and thank my colleagues--Mr. Landry, Mr. Gohmert, and Mr. Goodlatte--for their hard work and their strong leadership on this important issue. I also want to thank the chairman for incorporating the Rigell-Landry bill in the underlying bill, the Right to Habeas Corpus Act. The amendment before us this evening provides absolute clarity that every American has full protection under, and access to, the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus. Specifically, it requires that a detained person has the ability to file an application for habeas corpus relief in an appropriate district court no later than 30 days after the date on which the person was placed in military custody. Further, it requires that the administration--current and those to follow--that Congress is notified within 48 hours of a person having been detained under the AUMF in the United States. The 30-day access to habeas corpus and the 48-hour reporting requirement strengthen the underlying bill. They strengthen liberty. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize, to honor, and to pay tribute to the life of Bishop Barnett K. Thoroughgood, founder of New Jerusalem Church of God in Christ in Virginia Beach, who passed away too early from this Earth in February. He was a man of God, an inspiring leader, a tremendous, positive influence in our community, and a truly outstanding American. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to please help me welcome his family here today, his wife of 39 years, Ernestine; son, Jonathan; daughter, Mekia; handsome grandson, Caleb--who was just in my office--and many other distinguished guests who have come with the family today. I think the measure of a man or a woman is the legacy they leave to their children, and the legacy left by Bishop Thoroughgood is exemplary. The good bishop dedicated his life to serving God, his fellow man, and his community. He was a titan in the field of human rights. He was loved by fellow clergy and the community in which he served. He was a truly gifted speaker, and he used that gift to be a blessing to others. This is what was written about the bishop in the Virginia Pilot: Bishop Thoroughgood liked to say he started preaching at the age of five, when he spent many days sharing Jesus with the prison work crews that came to clean ditches in his Seatack neighborhood. At 20 years old, he started the New Jerusalem Church of God in Christ. Across his career, he received many educational honors leading to his doctorate of ministry. He served as the district superintendent to the Virginia Beach district and second administrative assistant to Bishop Samuel L. Greene, Jr. He was amazingly active in the community and received so many awards that if I read them out today, I think it would fill the Congressional Record. He also served as a member of the Virginia Beach Clergy Association and Ministerial Alliance. He was the founder and president of the Hampton Roads Ecumenical Council of Bishops. He led mission trips to Haiti and outreach to the poor. His sermons were literally broadcast around the world. So many were touched by his words, which I think explains why at the wake the night before his funeral 2,500 people were there, and 4,000 folks showed up to the funeral. I was honored to share just a few words with the family. I just ask that God would bless the family and watch over them, give them peace, and that the message that the bishop had lived his life conveying would be continued. That truly is the way, I believe, we honor the bishop's life is by continuing his work, his compassion for others, his commitment to making sure that all Americans cross the finish line, always centered on family, always centered on God, and always mindful of his obligations as an American. Bishop Thoroughgood leaves to cherish his memories, again, his lovely wife, Ernestine Thoroughgood; his sons, Bertram, Emmanuel, and Jonathan; daughter, Mekia; four brothers--large family, wonderful family that we had here this morning--five grandchildren, and many children they've adopted and helped through the social services foster care program; the New Jerusalem Church family; and the members of the Church of God in Christ worldwide. Mr. Speaker, I close as I began, just knowing that it's a high honor to pay tribute to his life. I think it embodies the very best of what it means to be an American, to be part of our Hampton Roads community, and to be a Virginian. So with that, I ask God's continued grace on the family.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Mr. RIGELL. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I rise tonight, Madam Speaker, in strong support of the NDAA that we'll vote on this week. And I also rise to really sound the alarm, Madam Speaker, about a budgetary cut to our Defense Department that is looming. It's right around the corner. And early January of next year, if not averted, it would have a most serious and detrimental impact on our ability to defend our great country. And I want to talk about that and share this with the American people. It's a matter of serious and grave importance, and it really should be understood by every American. Now, Madam Speaker, I have the great privilege of serving and representing the Second District of Virginia, southeast corner, all the Eastern Shore, all of Virginia Beach, a good part of Norfolk and a bit of Hampton. Includes the Norfolk Naval Air Station, Norfolk Naval Station, Norfolk Naval Air Station Oceania, with the Dam Neck Annex, the Joint Expeditionary Base, Little Creek, Fort Story, Joint Base Langley, Eustis, Wallace Island Surface Combat Systems. The 1 percent, they live in our district, they serve in our district. You see them in the lines at a Starbucks or the restaurants and businesses around town. They're hardworking men and women. They love their country, and they serve with great distinction. Indeed, it's the district, of all 435, it has the highest concentration of men and women in uniform of all 435 districts. And it really is a high honor and really a high responsibility and duty to serve and represent the Second District. I completely identify with my friend, the gentleman from New York, when the gentleman was referring to how he was inspired by his father's service. Indeed, that's why I sought this office is to honor my father's service, who was in World War II as a marine at Iwo Jima, and really the generation he represents, and also to meet the deep obligation that we have to our grandchildren and our children, and that is to pass on the blessings of liberty and freedom. And the principal way we do that is by meeting our constitutional duty to defend this great country. Where we're headed, in January of next year, is in direct conflict with us meeting that deep obligation, the cuts that potentially will come if we don't avert it, and I'm doing everything I can with my colleagues here tonight to avert that. The formal term is ``sequestration.'' And as a businessman, I refer to it as a violent reduction. It's between 8 and 12 percent reduction. And it happens immediately. Even for those who believe that our budget for defense ought to be less, there's no person that I know of that would agree that this is the responsible way to do it. Now, as I look for leadership, the House has passed a mechanism by which sequestration would be completely averted and, indeed, I have already introduced an amendment to the NDAA which will come to the floor and I hope will pass, which will incorporate that mechanism into the NDAA, so a vote for the NDAA is also a vote to avert sequestration. To put this in perspective, in addition to the $487 billion that was reduced by the President's budget, this is another $492 billion. It's almost a $1 trillion reduction over 10 years. It would have disastrous consequences for soldiers, veterans, national security and the economy. I'll share with you a few examples of, really, the practical implications of this and how detrimental they are: the smallest ground force since 1940; a fleet of fewer than 230 ships when we know that our maritime needs are not decreasing--they're increasing--principally, in the Pacific. Now, that would be the smallest level since 1915; the smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force. I know that there are other Representatives here tonight, my colleagues, who want to speak on this issue, so I want to close with this thought: I mentioned earlier that leadership is really about setting a clear and compelling vision for our country and then laying out that it's incumbent upon that person to also have a practical plan--the steps that the country needs to take to make that vision a reality. I am very proud of the House in that we passed a comprehensive plan to do just that. As I look at where the administration is, there truly isn't a plan, and our Commander in Chief has not risen to address sequestration. In fact, he has made it clear that he would veto efforts to avert sequestration. I look to the Senate, and there is absolutely no action coming out of there. It hasn't passed a budget in over 1,000 days. I am respectfully asking the American people to look at the record. I believe we are an imperfect party in that we haven't done everything just right, yet the record is clear: We have a plan; it's there; it has been passed. In the Senate, there is no plan. The administration really has no plan particularly when it comes to averting sequestration. So, when my amendment comes to the floor tomorrow--or whenever it does hit the floor--I trust that my colleagues will see the wisdom of incorporating that into the NDAA. It would avert sequestration. This needs to happen in order to meet the deep obligation that we have to every American in order to honor the veterans who have served, to honor those veterans who are serving now and our gold star families--those who have lost loved ones in service to our country. I trust and believe we will do the right thing.

Mr. RIGELL. I thank the gentlelady, my friend. It's a pleasure and a privilege to serve with the gentlelady on the House Armed Services Committee. I appreciate her leadership on the House Armed Services Committee and in holding this time tonight to talk about just the critical subject of defending this great country. Just last night, I was with Congressman Forbes and Congressman Wittman in Chesapeake, Virginia, listening for over an hour to local contractors speaking about how this looming issue of sequestration is already affecting not only our larger economy in our region, but also just our ability to defend our great country. Companies are making decisions right now and critical and talented people are being laid off right now in advance of the sequestration that very well could occur in January of next year. If I go back to my previous comments, I was talking about the failure of leadership, as I see it, the administration and also the Senate, because it's so important to understand kind of how we got here. In the role of Commander in Chief, it is really incumbent upon the President, in my view, to articulate and put forth a plan that would avert what his Secretary of Defense has made so clear is completely unacceptable. The level of cuts, the severity of the cuts, the suddenness of the cuts is really what we're referring to here. It's not the almost half a trillion that was already proposed in the administration's budget. That's bad enough. We're here tonight, I think in part, to sound the alarm to the American people that this is an additional almost half a trillion dollars of cuts. Mr. Speaker, you cannot build 90 percent of a submarine; you cannot build 90 percent of a carrier. It will be a legal nightmare. Contracts will have to be broken and then renegotiated. It will be a quagmire from just a legal standpoint. So I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for the opportunity to again address this critical issue. And I call upon the administration and I call upon the Senate to meet the House where we are, which is to put forth specific plans. This is leadership. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter a statement into the Record on behalf of my constituent, Dr. Israel Zoberman. Dr. Zoberman is the Founding Rabbi of Congregation Beth Chaverim in Virginia Beach, Virginia. He is also the president of the Hampton Roads Board of Rabbis and Cantors. Dr. Zoberman asked me to enter the following remarks into the Record recognizing Elie Wiesel. Dr. Zoberman's statement follows: ``With over 50 books to his illustrious credit, Elie Wiesel continues to bless us at age 84 with his multiple pursuits, including recently as a musician of his childhood songs and melodies. If anyone deserves the honorary appellation of ``Our Teacher and Rabbi'' these unsettling times of post-Holocaust perplexities for Jew and Gentile, it is this distinguished yet humble survivor of the Holocaust's unique tragedy, calling upon us to bear sacred witness with Zachor's undying remembrance. He emerged from the ``Kingdom Of The Night'' resolved to help save humanity, struggling with his shaken faith in his early classic ``Night,'' while contending with his brethren's fate in Soviet captivity in ``Jews Of Silence,'' ever faithful to his rich Jewish moorings as well as universal culture. Wiesel, a 1986 Nobel Peace Laureate--he should receive one for literature too--is on the very short list of those serving as humanity's conscience. He courageously speaks out for human rights in addition to his ``Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity,'' and academic work as the Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities at Boston University. Among many awards and honors, this great American and humanitarian is a recipient of the United States Congressional Gold Medal along with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and is the 1980 Founding Chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, receiving on May 16th, 2011, the first U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Award, the museum's highest honor, now bearing Wiesel's name. He turned down, reportedly, in 2007 the sure opportunity to become Israel's President. Wiesel's latest literary gem, ``The Sonderberg Case,'' is a suspenseful Holocaust related novel reflecting his being at home both in the vineyard of Jewish knowledge as well as general philosophy and literature. Wiesel is the Founding President of the Universal Academy of Cultures. In the book, Werner Sonderberg's grandpa, and unrepentant ex-Nazi officer of the notorious Einsatzgruppen, boasts to his grandson of his murderous record and only regretting that Hitler lost the war with hope of yet a future victory. My own maternal aunt, Bas-Malka Bobrov Gurvitz, husband Shachne and children Aharon, 14, Yisrael, 12, and Rochel-Leah, 2, were murdered in Sarny, the Ukraine, on August 27 28, 1942, among 14,000 Jews by the Einsatzgruppen and their collaborators. My grandma Esther Bobrov was killed by German air bombs when on the run with my mother, Chasia, from their hometown Sarny. My great- grandparents, Rabbi Yaacov and Dena Manzies Zoberman from Zamosc, Poland, perished in the Belzec death camp and great-grandparents Yitzchak and Zipora Anker were also among the many victims from both family sides, of the 6 million martyrs with its million and a half children. Five million Gentiles were murdered by the Nazis with World War II claiming the lives of 50 million. My uncle, Emanuel Zoberman, who was a member of a Russian attached Polish commando unit, helped liberate Poland and was killed while crossing the Oder River. My father, Yechiel Zoberman, served in the Russian Army for five years, fighting on the outskirts of Moscow and St. Petersburg (Leningrad), among other battles. We cherish the enormous sacrifices of the heroic American military and all the Allied Forces, along with Righteous Gentiles who stepped forward to protect human dignity and honor. Wiesel applies the Holocaust's awesome lessons of guilt and responsibility, resonating in the anguished sharing of his German students at Boston University, as well as those of healing and hope, to the lingering conflict between Palestinians and Israelis while trying to acknowledge all concerned and seeking to protect the ``The Other'' that both sides have suffered from. He probingly reflects on the opposite polls and messages of Auschwitz and Jerusalem, altering and sensitizing us toward mutually respectful and professional relations, and that what we do bears moral consequence. Wiesel eases the burden of memory without diluting its sacred essence. The outstanding Holocaust Commission of the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater of which I have been a proud member for many years, sponsors this season the 15th annual Elie Wiesel Writing Competition and the 10th annual Elie Wiesel Visual Arts Competition. Teachers' Awards for Excellence in Holocaust Education are also given out at an inspiring annual gathering of commemoration. A new documentary, ``What We Carry,'' featuring four local survivors, Dana Cohen, Kitty Saks and of blessed memory David Katz and Hanns Loewenbach, has already received high acclaim. So close to recalling the destruction of 2/3 of European Jewry--a 1/3 of world Jewry--which has reduced the potential of the Jewish people and humanity, we celebrate this year the 64th anniversary of the only Jewish state, The State of Israel, that is America's very special democratic ally in an uncertain world. With its deep historical roots in the Middle East from whence its prophets challenged humanity with the message of universal shalom, the reestablished Third Jewish Commonwealth absorbed the remnant of Holocaust survivors and dispersed Jews from over 100 countries and diverse cultures, bound together by shared faith and fate. It has set a high bar with its astonishing accomplishments in all fields of human endeavor in spite of mighty existential threats, as it rose from the ashes of a consuming Holocaust following a most trying history of exile and denial, with its survival vow, ``Never Again!'' In the midst of a still raging ``Arab Spring'' with the Syrian slaughter continuing and the international community doing so little, a reminder of the Holocaust's years of deafening silence, Israel's flourishing democracy and loadable stability stand out in a region lacking both, as a beacon of hope and noble example. Iran, whose theocratic leaders are Holocaust deniers calling for Israel's destruction, is a threat to the entire world. It is the world's largest exporter of terrorism seeking a nuclear capability to further its goals of de-stabilization and dominion, and being able to conclude what Hitler began.''

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Washington. I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to come before this body today and make the case that this is wonderful and strong legislation that should be moved forward for one purpose: job creation in the Commonwealth of Virginia and, specifically, in Accomack County. It, indeed, is a jobs bill. It reflects common sense. It reflects common ground. It came out of committee with bipartisan support. And I think most importantly, Mr. Chairman, it reflects the collective wisdom and the will of the hardworking taxpayers of Accomack County. Here is why, Mr. Chairman, this bill, if passed and enacted, will create jobs: You see, the folks of Accomack County have not asked the Federal Government for something. They've simply asked the Federal Government to get out of the way so that the greatest job-producing engine the world has ever known, the American entrepreneurs, and Accomack County can get to work in a very responsible way of developing this property that is immediately adjacent to the Wallops NASA facility there. It is, I think, a clear contrast of two basic philosophical approaches to job creation. One looks to this institution and to Washington to see that this institution is the primary driver of job creation. As a lifetime entrepreneur, Mr. Chairman, I reject that approach and, instead, have adopted all of my life and believe we need to bring to this body the mindset that the best thing to do to get our economy going again is to eliminate the hurdles. This is a very practical hurdle that is holding back job creation in a county that desperately needs jobs. Mr. Chairman, 16 percent of the hardworking families in Accomack County live under the poverty line. About 90 percent of the property that's in Accomack County is agricultural. It is without a doubt a poor county, and this bill simply removes a deed restriction. My friend behind me just a few moments ago said, Do you have a picture of this? I said, Well, we didn't bring it down to the floor, but we could have. It's just overgrown. There's nothing there. There's a dilapidated dugout facility, and that's it. There's no parking, there's no infrastructure, there's no buildings. Accomack County has a plan. Americans are resourceful. They'll figure their way out of this in spite of Washington. The board of supervisors has a wonderful plan for the Wallops Research Park; but it only works, Mr. Chairman, if this deed restriction is removed. Thirty-two acres. Great potential for the folks in Accomack County. I want to close, Mr. Chairman, by recounting a conversation that I had just a few moments ago. I actually called the person back. I wanted to make sure I had her permission to share this story. I trust she's listening now. Mr. Chairman, her name is Kathy Wert. Her husband is a builder in Accomack County, and their business has been hurting because of the economy. Jim's a friend of mine, and I know his business is hurting. Kathy used to work for him in accounting. She's been out looking for work because the construction business is so depressed. And we all know that. I called Kathy and said, I would like to reference you here. Do I have your permission? And she said, Yes, you do. This is just one family. There are hundreds and hundreds of families in Accomack County. I wish my colleagues on the other side who are opposing this bill could look them in the eye and explain to them why we can't remove this deed restriction. It's a classic example, Mr. Chairman, of a paternalistic Federal Government, an oppressive Federal Government, holding back job creation. We're all American taxpayers. This idea of transferring it from one to another, $800,000 or more from a poor county, this is what is wrong with America, Mr. Chairman. Even though this is a relatively small bill in the big scheme of things--32 acres--when the Federal Government owns almost one-third of all the land in the United States, that, too, is a problem. Maybe we'll get around to that one day, Mr. Chairman; but until then we're just talking about 32 acres. So I would ask my colleagues on the other side to reconsider, and I would ask them to vote in favor of this, and let's get some hardworking folks in Accomack County back to work.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. I thank the gentleman from Utah. Mr. Speaker, it's a real privilege today to speak on behalf of the bill that I'm introducing. It is indeed a jobs bill. It is a bill that reflects common sense. It's a bill that reflects common ground. And I think, importantly, it reflects the wisdom and the will of the good, hardworking residents of Accomack County in Virginia, whom I have the privilege of representing. It enjoyed bipartisan support in coming out of committee, and it enjoys and should enjoy and merits today bipartisan support when it comes before the full House for a vote. Here's why if it's passed it will work toward job creation. Unlike so many measures that some have proposed, instead of looking to Washington to actually spend more money or for Washington to do something, the folks of Accomack County are simply asking for the Federal Government to get out of the way and allow the greatest job-producing engine the world has ever known, Mr. Speaker, the American entrepreneur, to go forward and to put hardworking folks to work and put precious and limited capital to work. This bill simply removes a deed restriction. That's all it does. And this deed restriction is, in effect, a restriction on job creation. It's a restriction on much needed tax revenue that this county so desperately needs. Sixteen percent unemployment; sixteen percent of the folks there live at the poverty level. Accomack County is 90 percent agricultural, a bit of tourism, and then the NASA Wallops Facility. This piece of property is adjacent to the NASA Wallops Facility; and presently, with this deed restriction, they can't use it at all for any economic growth or opportunity. Removing this deed restriction will allow the board of supervisors there to move forward with their Wallops Research Park. They are desperate to get this done, and I am ready to help them today. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, this bill enjoyed bipartisan support in committee. It does not require any money coming from the Federal Government. We're simply asking for the Federal Government to get out of the way and let the hardworking folks of Accomack County get on with job creation.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, Youcef Nadarkhani is a Christian pastor in Iran who at this very moment is under sentence of death for refusing to convert to Islam. As a matter of conscience, Pastor Youcef's story must be boldly told in this chamber and in every place where human rights are valued. His story reminds us of the blessings of liberty which we enjoy and sometimes take for granted. It reminds us that millions of people around the world live under brutal regimes that deny those same basic freedoms to their own people. In 2009, Pastor Youcef protested a law that would forcibly impose Islam on his children. In September 2010 an Iranian court accused Pastor Youcef of the ``crime'' of abandoning the Islamic faith and condemned him to death by hanging unless he converts to Islam. Mr. Speaker, this case represents just one in a long line of abuses the government of Iran has perpetrated against religious minorities. The intolerant, indeed barbaric, actions of the Iranian regime trample on the most basic of human rights--the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. I condemn it in the strongest possible terms. Iranian leaders must understand that if Iran is to be a legitimate member of the community of nations, if it seeks trade, if it seeks the benefit of economic engagement with the free world, if it wants to provide a firm and secure future for its citizens, it must protect and defend the rights of religious minorities. It must respect the religious liberties which its own constitution guarantees, and which it is obligated to respect as a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. So I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 556 condemning the government of Iran for its continued persecution, imprisonment, and sentencing of Pastor Youcef on the charge of apostasy. I am a cosponsor of this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter a statement into the Record on behalf of the family of Bishop Barnett Karl Thoroughgood: ``Bishop Barnett Karl Thoroughgood was born November 7, 1949 in Princess Anne Co., to the parentage of Mr. John Thomas Thoroughgood and Mrs. Mildred B. Cooper Thoroughgood. He was the 7th of 9 children, one whom (John Thoroughgood) preceded him in death. He received his formative education through the Princess Anne County School system and graduated from the former Union Kempsville High School in 1967. He received many educational honors taking him to his Doctorate of Ministry. In 1970, Bishop Thoroughgood founded the New Jerusalem COGIC. He served as District Superintendent of the Virginia Beach District and 2nd Administrative Assistant to Bishop Samuel L. Green, Jr. He was very active in the community and received numerous awards. He also served as a member of the Virginia Beach Clergy Association and Ministerial Alliance. He was the founder and President of the Hampton Roads Ecumenical Council of Bishops. Bishop Thoroughgood leaves to cherish his memories his loving wife of 39 years, Mrs. Ernestine Thoroughgood; his sons Bertram, Emmanuel, and Jonnathan; One daughter, Mekia Bonita; four brothers, Olanda (Silvia) Thoroughgood, Darnell (Jean) Thoroughgood, YD (Shylene) Thoroughgood, Paul (Darlene) Thoroughgood; three sisters, Constance Spence, Alice Faye (Purnell) Major, Paulette (Joseph) Spence, one adopted sister, Mable Beckett (Robert) five grandchildren, many children they have adopted and helped through the Social Services Foster Care Program, the New Jerusalem Church family, and the members of the Church of God in Christ worldwide.''

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong objection to the President's decision requiring employers to provide insurance coverage for services which clearly violate their religious convictions. Many American employers are deeply offended and strenuously object to being forced by the administration to pay for contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs for their employees. This is an egregious violation of the First Amendment, which protects religious freedom. Preventing government intrusion into the faith and religious convictions of Americans is precisely why our Founders embedded religious freedom into the First Amendment. This is not a slight to the Constitution; it is an assault. The White House has said that adequate exemptions have been made, but this is simply not so. I stand with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in both Houses of Congress in defending the right of conscience, our Constitution, and the right of all Americans to exercise their religious beliefs freely without intrusion from the Federal Government. I call on the administration to reverse its decision today.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, we have within our grasp the opportunity to boldly address two of America's greatest challenges: energy security and unemployment. These two issues are inextricably linked. We can no longer tolerate a stagnant, slow-growth economy that's saddled with historic unemployment rates and a dangerous dependence on foreign oil. A key solution to these problems is energy, specifically, American energy. The President said in this House that we must have an all-of-the- above strategy to energy independence. I agree. That includes harvesting the energy in every corner of America, including the 3.8 billion barrels of oil and gas off the coast of Virginia. Last week, I introduced the Mid-Atlantic Energy and Jobs Act of 2012 to free up Virginia's abundant offshore energy. This legislation will help us achieve energy independence and could produce more than 18,000 local jobs, and it requires a significant amount of the royalties produced by the exploration to go toward improving our environment. The time to act is now. This Congress, this President, we're Americans. Let's do this.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. I thank the gentleman for yielding and bringing this to our attention. It's a critical matter facing our country. It has a direct impact on job creation, and I regret the way it's headed. That impact is adverse. And so we rise tonight, I believe all of us do, in defense of the folks who would be most directly impacted by it, the folks who are producing our cars, the folks who are selling and servicing our cars and the related industries. I come to this body, and I know we all do, regardless of political affiliation, with the idea that we are first Americans. And I always try to find where do we agree. I start out tonight thinking we surely agree that it's a good idea for fuel economy standards and performance to increase over time. We share that with our colleagues on the other side. Yet that is also regrettably the point of demarcation because there is a sharp contrast, I believe, between where the administration is headed with this. This is yet a third level of regulation on an industry that is already highly regulated. The Department of Transportation, the State of California itself, and now, and I believe unwisely so, the administration is allowing, in fact, encouraging the EPA to inject itself into this. There are multiple flaws in this path that I believe the administration is on through the EPA. I just want to touch on one, Judge. Because as you noted, I've had the privilege of being in this great industry for a long time. Since I was about the age of 23, I've had the privilege of being a retail automobile dealer for about 21 of those years, and through our organizations had the great pleasure of retailing over 100,000 automobiles in our market and have spent a tremendous amount of time on the sales floor. You know, we know this instinctively, that as the price increases, demand will drop. Now, this may be, I think, some noteworthy news to some who are in the regulatory business here, but an additional $30 a month, I've seen it oftentimes, it becomes the stopping point for families, and rightfully so. As they try to live within a budget, $30 a month--$1 dollar a day you could say--that is in and of itself enough for a family to make a different purchasing decision. The math is pretty easy. With over a $3,000 increase in a vehicle over 60 months--I think my math is pretty good here--it would be at least $50, not to include interest, on a monthly basis. So on the margin we would see in dealerships across this country decisions to not buy cars. The higher the price, the fewer the buyers. Now, that which seems so obvious to us--let me read from the regulation itself here. The administration's proposed regulation states: ``Since the impact of this proposal on sales is unknown and sales have the largest potential effect on employment''--here's the point of note--``the impact of this proposal on employment is also unknown.'' Judge, I'd submit to you tonight, well, the EPA and the Obama administration may not understand the impact of these regulations on employment, but I do. I think the American people do. Sales go down, employment follows. The only thing that increases is the pain, real pain and suffering, of American families on the margin. Some employers have to tighten up, some manufacturers have to tighten up because of the decreased demand. So Judge, I stand with you tonight. I applaud your leadership in this matter. And I hope that the EPA will reconsider--in fact, come to a full stop and allow the CAFE standards that have been in place since 2007 to guide us going forward. They're doing a good job. Manufacturers are improving in their fuel economy standards. It's a wise course of action to stay where we are. And I thank you again for your leadership.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter a statement into the Record on behalf of my constituent, Sam Katz. Mr. Katz asked me to enter the following remarks into the Record in remembrance of his father, David Katz. Mr. Katz's statement follows: Today, we mourn the loss of a great man; a man who to us was simply known and loved as, ``Daddy.'' Daddy was first and foremost a loving, caring, and dedicated husband for nearly 59 years to the wonderful lady we simply know and love as, ``Mommy.'' Daddy's love and support for Mommy is something every man should learn from. We could not have asked for a more loving and dedicated father. Always a father, he was also our mentor, teacher, and when necessary, a friend. We were deeply blessed with a very peaceful and loving family life with two wonderful parents. We always believed our parents' love for each other was strong. However, throughout Daddy's illnesses this past year, it became beautifully and painfully clear that their marriage was sustained by true and genuine love. There were times in the hospital and in care facilities when Mommy would go to extremes just to give Daddy a kiss because it meant so much to her, and for as long as we can remember, Mommy was the glimmer in Daddy's eyes. This was not a marriage that lasted out of convenience or for the sake of their four children. This beautiful and long marriage endured better, worse, richer, poorer, sickness and health, and was still parted only by death. We never heard a cross word spoken between Mommy and Daddy, and never even heard them call each other by their first names. Everyone should be so fortunate! Growing up was a lot of fun. We went on regular summer vacations. Daddy traveled quite a bit and at times, would take one or more of us with him on the road. We traveled to family Bar and Bat Mitzvahs and spent as much time as possible together as a family. Family dinners were very important to Daddy. We would wait for him to come home from work and the entire family would have dinner together and talk about our day. We spent evenings together watching our 19" black and white TV in the family room--the only TV in the house. This was very important to Mommy and Daddy. We didn't have TVs in our bedrooms and our parents didn't hide away in theirs watching TV. There were lots of great moments that probably weren't so great for Daddy, such as: us kids learning to drive or taking apart cars in the garage. Through it all, Daddy was always a dedicated father with our best interests in his sights. He genuinely wanted each of us to succeed and to be our best. Daddy lived his life the proudest man in the world. He always bragged about Mommy and us four children; he treasured the fact that we remained close through our adult lives. As we got older, each of us children chose a career path and moved out on our own. We stayed in touch and enjoyed many family gatherings where we grew up in Williamsville, NY, in New Jersey and for the past 17 years, in Chesapeake, Virginia. At times, we (the kids) would stay up all night talking and having fun. About the only thing that has changed over the years is that now we sometimes stay up as late as ten p.m. Thanksgiving has always been a very special time for all of us to unite, and this past year was no different. It meant the world to Daddy to be home and with his family. With his health declining before our eyes over Thanksgiving weekend, he remained that proud and wonderful man: the Daddy that we all loved. We are all very proud to have given him this gift, and are convinced this time together has made his journey from this earth more peaceful. Daddy's other loves: classical music and photography. Born of two concert musicians, he studied piano at the age of three, violin at five, and once arriving in the United States, composition at one of the finest music conservatories in New York. He performed under the batons of some of the greatest conductors in the world. While Daddy's ears are probably still ringing from the blasting rock and roll sounds from our teenage bedrooms, classical music of some fashion has touched all of our lives over the years. Daddy peacefully passed with classical music playing in his room. A self-taught accomplished photographer, his one-person shows over the years were awe-inspiring and his natural creativity will never be duplicated. Those that share his passion for photography will never forget the lessons learned from him over many years. Thankfully, he was also the kindest critic. In closing: Daddy didn't talk a lot about being a Holocaust survivor while we were growing up. We would get ``sound bites.'' For example, when we would ask him to drive us somewhere close, he would respond with: ``I walked 500 miles to the Swiss border when I was your age.'' We had no idea it was really true. Over the years, we started to understand a little more about his survival, but he was never willing to document it. Thankfully, when he retired, he took the time, and now his story has been published in several books including a wonderful autobiography. His story is also presented in several Holocaust documentaries and with the Shoah Foundation. Daddy was well known throughout the Tidewater community as he regularly spoke about his Holocaust years at schools, military installations, and many other organizations. His story will live on for those that will never have the opportunity to meet the great man, Daddy.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay respectful tribute to a fallen hero, Major Samuel Mark Griffith, United States Marine Corps. Major Griffith, known as ``Sam'' to his family and friends, was killed in action in Afghanistan last week. Mr. Speaker, I attended Sam's memorial service yesterday; and in the service, a very moving letter was read that had been written by a marine in Sam's unit. It described how Sam had insisted on taking the other marine's place on the next nightly patrol, because the patrols were receiving enemy fire each time they went out. Sam knew full well the inherent danger and the risk involved in the next patrol. It was Sam's nature to run to danger in defense of freedom and in defense of his fellow marines. Sam leaves behind a wonderful family, including his wife, Casey, and two fine young boys, Chad and Noah. Mr. Speaker, the burden of defending freedom has fallen heavy on the Griffith family. So we pause today in this House, and rightfully so, to honor Sam and to extend our heartfelt sympathy and deepest condolences to the Griffith family, asking that God would grant them a special measure of peace and grace in the days ahead.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter a statement into the Record on behalf of my constituent, Dr. Israel Zoberman. Dr. Zoberman is the Founding Rabbi of Congregation Beth Chaverim in Virginia Beach, Virginia. He is also the president of the Hampton Roads Board of Rabbis and Cantors. Dr. Zoberman asked me to enter the following remarks into the Record regarding Chanuka. Dr. Zoberman's statement follows. Chanuka's origins in the drama of a small people standing up to the might of the Hellenistic empire of antiquity is a poignant symbol and a timeless reminder of Israel's unique and timely legacy. The Maccabees' successful revolt in 167 B.C.E. against the dictates of King Antiochus IV that sought to deprive the Jews of practicing their faith, was truly a stance of a proud conscience. Our refusal to submit to a superior physical power when our spiritual inheritance was at stake, is a clear indication of how deep a bond we held with our religious convictions, ready to sacrifice the sacred gift of life for the sake of an ancestral covenant with the God of Freedom and Responsibility. The word Chanuka and its very meaning represent the spirit of dedication to noble ideals and ideas through the cleansing of Jerusalem's temple of old from pagan defilement. The Talmud's insisting focus on the miracle of the cruse of oil lasting eight days reflects the Rabbis' aversion to the bloodshed and the Hasmoneans' intra-political strife, associated with the war and beyond. Consequently, the Book of the Maccabees was not included in our own Biblical canon but was fortunately preserved through the Catholic one. In truth, the conflict was not only against the enemy from without, but also in response to the experienced assimilation from within. The encounter with the dominant, flourishing and tempting Greek culture led, however, to a fruitful engagement influencing Rabbinic thought and logic. The flickering lights of Chanuka have come to represent through centuries of trying suffering the miracle of Jewish survival in spite of great odds, while endowing the human family with an enduring, undying hope for a world transformed and redeemed. Let us continue to pray and labor that the ancient promise of prophetic Shalom from the hills of Judea, the first such inspiring and courageous message of universal embrace, will yet be realized for all of God's children including the offspring of Isaac and Ishmael whose familial bond cannot be denied. How frustrating that there are Palestinian leaders attempting to re-write history by removing the incontrovertible Jewish connection with the Temple Mount, seeking to extinguish Chanuka's authenticity. As our American nation, the State of Israel and the entire free world fight the blight of contemporary terrorism with Iran begrudging the Maccabeean victory leading the way, much can be learned from the Maccabees' old and new saga and spirit. The terrorists negate the life-enlightening, pluralistic and inclusive principles of Chanuka's bright Menorah daring to challenge the darkness. All humans have now become like vulnerable Jews yet empowered with our people's indomitable faith and heroic example to face an oppressive foe--physically, spiritually, and psychologically--and prevail.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter a statement into the record on behalf of my constituent, Reverend Aaron Wheeler: ``Pastor Charles Henry Williams has been a pillar of strength and love to his flock at the Morning Star Baptist Church and to the good people of the 2nd Congressional District of Virginia for more than 40 years. He has labored in the vineyard as a pastor and leader to all who knew and loved him, and his accomplishments are truly remarkable. From the moment Dr. Williams was called to the ministry in 1967, he embraced feeding the poor and seeking the lost for the Lord. Pastor Williams served on too numerous boards and committees to mention. Some of the organizations he served in as a faithful member and in leadership positions were the Virginia Beach Minister's Conference, Sharon Missionary Association of Suffolk and the Tidewater Metro Minister's Conference. And on a lighter note, Pastor Williams was honored by the Virginia Beach Afro-American Cultural Council as an ``Honorary Cowboy'' in 1999. This man of God was bestowed with an Honorary Doctorate Degree from Norfolk Seminary in 1997. The former Mayor of Virginia Beach acknowledged that December 4, 1994 was officially, ``Pastor Charles Henry Williams Day'' in the city of Virginia Beach. It is evident to all those who interacted with Pastor Williams just how much this humble man truly loved his family. The people of the 2nd Congressional District of the State of Virginia give honor to Pastor Charles Henry Williams, as his untimely leaving is our loss but heaven's gain. The Bible rang true for his service to this world in the scripture of 2 Timothy 4:7-8: ``I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge will give to me on that Day.''

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to address two matters that are of great concern to the good folks of the Second Congressional District of Virginia and, I believe, to every American across this great land. Those two issues are job creation and why our Congress is so dysfunctional. As a businessperson with a lifetime of experience in creating jobs and fixing things, I really want to emphasize the practical solutions that I think we can bring to bear on these two important issues. I don't think, Madam Speaker, that there is a family in America that has not been affected in some way or another by this painful economy. Unemployment continues to hover around 9 percent. My wife, Teri, and I have two dear families in our lives who have lost their business because of the economy and how difficult things are. They are small businesses. We watched them and walked with them through as they had to file bankruptcy and let go of their employees. And, Madam Speaker, the problem is particularly acute in our black community. For black men, the unemployment rate is over 19 percent. This should concern every American and command our full attention. Madam Speaker, this is my first elected office--I have been up here about 10\1/2\ months or so--but I've had 30 years of experience in job creation. The first business that my wife and I started when I was 22 years old was a cleaning business, and we started it because we had more money going out than we had coming in. I had a couple of options, and it seemed like the best one was to start a small business, and we did--a cleaning business. We hired two people: Teri hired me and I hired her. That is how we got started. I know, and I fully understand what an entrepreneur, a small businessowner or a potential small businessowner, experiences when they're trying to put capital at risk to get what I refer to as an entrepreneurial return. I know that healthy fear that really inspires you to work long hours. We would call it key-to-key, open your business and close your business at night. I know the great joy of being able to say to someone these wonderful words, ``you're hired.'' I also know what it's like to sit down with a banker, a good friend, a person who stood by us in difficult times, but yet they've come to the end, and they say, Scott, I can't help you, meaning they can't approve a critical loan. I understand what that's like. It all revolves around, whether you own a big business or a small business, there's something in common, and that is every business has a financial statement, an income statement. And if we look at the income statement, that document that is being looked at by entrepreneurs across America and if we start at the top and you just go down line by line and if you see the intersection of what we're doing here in Congress in our Federal Government, you see the intersection of the actions that we're taking with each line on a financial statement. I'd submit, Madam Speaker, that the evidence is clear that the steps that we're taking in this Congress--well, at least on our side I believe the Republicans are taking the right steps, but the cumulative effect of what's taking place in this Chamber, in the Senate, and in the White House has made it ever more difficult for the American entrepreneur to make it, to give them a reasonable expectation that they could achieve what we refer to as an entrepreneurial profit. Listen, if a person is okay with a 2 percent return or a 1 percent return, they'll just leave their money where it is. It takes a lot of courage, I think, for a person to put a second mortgage on their home, to call a family member to borrow money or save up over years and maybe put $15,000 at risk. They have to be able to earn a better return than that. And in doing so, they'll start to hire people. Let's just take a look at a basic job creator's financial statement. Now, it may look slightly different from one industry or one business to another, but it always starts out at the top with this category right here: sales. Nothing happens until you sell something. It could be anything. It could be cupcakes like some wonderful entrepreneurs in our district. It could be automobiles, it could be homes, and it could be energy and those companies that supply and help us become more independent. Let's look at this critical area. We have over $500 billion a year that is flowing out of our country, capital that should be circulating within America. Is it here? No. It's going outside of this country to folks like Hugo Chavez. They do not share our values, and we are funding them because of our failure--Republicans and Democrats--year after year after year in failing to move this great country toward energy independence. It is hurting us, Madam Speaker. Recently, I stood and clapped for our President as he walked in this Chamber, and I listened intently on September 8. He drew us together as Congress and said, I have a bold message for you. I desperately wanted to hear our President address energy independence. I waited expectantly, sitting right back over there. I didn't even get a chair. I think I was behind everybody and had to stand up. That's all right. The Chamber was full. There were some things I agreed with, and I said, yes, Mr. President, I can sign up for that. And I looked forward to improving or voting for the veterans bill and the reversal of that 3 percent withholding that would hurt so many contractors within the Second District of Virginia and also across this great country. And it also has a wonderful tax credit in it to help those who are helping and hiring our veterans. I look forward to supporting that and enthusiastically want to vote for it, and I support what the President is doing. But absent in his remarks, a 4,134-word address to Congress, was the word ``energy.'' Certainly absent was the phrase ``energy independence.'' This is a tragic mistake. It hurts America. It hurts employment in the Second Congressional District of Virginia and across this great land. We have so much opportunity to put folks at work with great-paying jobs. I'm talking about $70,000, $80,000-a-year jobs, and some of them will pay even more--good-paying jobs. We have great potential. And if there were any question about where the President stands on this issue, he made it abundantly clear last week. He said nothing, nothing off the coast of Virginia. The energy resources that are there will be locked up while residents of the Second District are hurting because they don't have employment opportunities. Madam Speaker, I would submit that our pain in America is largely self-inflicted. We are regulating ourselves out of our prosperity at every opportunity. It's wrong. We can and we should take a different direction. Let's look at the expenses faced by our small business owners. I just hit one area of sales. I could have gone a lot longer on that. Let's just go down to some of these expenses that we see here. Interest, well, interest rates are extraordinarily low right now. I'd say that is a positive thing. It's only because there's a near collapse of confidence in the European economy. That's why folks are still rushing over here to America, driving down interest rates. Do not be fooled. That will not sustain itself. There is a risk, and I would say it's backed by the evidence that folks ought to be mindful that interest rates can go up, and I think they likely will. When I talk to the bankers in our area, I'm not talking about the big shots in New York. I'm talking about homegrown banks--our neighbors, our friends--small banks, the ones that sponsor the Little League. They say, Scott, listen, we're not hiring account executives to go out and meet with your business and other small- and medium-sized businesses. We're hiring regulatory analysts just to deal with what's coming at us from Dodd-Frank. I had the president of a local bank tell me the other day, he said, Scott, listen, we're getting out of this line and this line of business because we just can't handle the regulatory burden. Now, I am not a no-regulation person. I hate to disappoint my libertarian friends, but I'm not a libertarian. I have a libertarian streak in me, but I'm not a libertarian. There is a proper role for government and, indeed, an essential role for government. I am for wiser, smarter, lighter regulations that will free up the greatest job- producing engine the world has ever known--the American entrepreneur. Let's look right here. We've covered interest and even the availability of capital. We're paying banks a small interest rate, a small return on their money, the government is; but we're not requiring them to loan it out. It's really a bizarre situation and one that's hurting our ability to grow our economy. Look at health care. The Affordable Health Care Act, if anything, has exploded the degree of uncertainty. I do not know a fellow entrepreneur in my district who can tell me where their costs are going other than they're going up. The Affordable Health Care Act, which still is an evolving document as it becomes kind of flushed out by the regulators, those who are writing all these regulations, is a moving target; people just don't know where it's going. So we've got uncertainty there on health care. Look at legal fees. We are the only country in the world that runs about 10 percent of our gross domestic product in legal fees. We are a litigious society, and our laws encourage that. It's wrong, and it puts an unnecessary burden on the American entrepreneur. And let's pause for just a moment and kind of define the American entrepreneur just for a moment. I'm not talking about highly sophisticated folks and MBAs and all that. I'm talking about the moms and the dads and the young people who are starting businesses out of their homes and relying on maybe some borrowed money from family or friends or a small second mortgage on their homes if they own a home. These are the burdens that we're putting in their way that makes it more difficult to, again, get a return, an entrepreneurial return on their investment. Accounting, accounting services. I love the CPAs out there in our communities, but they are having to deal with things, for example, our Tax Code, that is incredibly complex and unnecessarily so. I have found in my 10\1/2\ months here that the halls are filled with lobbyists. Now, some I think can provide us with good information; but some have only one mission, and that's just to find a strategic advantage for their industry or sector, and that is expressed in our Tax Code. And I, along with my colleagues--and I certainly can speak for my Republican colleagues and, I trust, for my friends who are Democrats--we can, we must, we will simplify our Tax Code. When I would sit down with our accountant every year as a small-, medium-sized business owner, my good friend David would say, Well, here's a tax return, Scott. And I would go through it, and with even 25, 30 years of business experience, I would say, David, I just don't understand this. I'm doing my very best to keep up with you. I just don't understand this. It is not right when an American wants to pay his or her fair share, whatever is expected and the law requires to pay, and there's not a person out there, including within the IRS, that can even confirm that you're paying it correctly. If you call the IRS and ask for guidance, that is no defense if you do it incorrectly. It's not right. EPA compliance at every turn. Look, we have a moral obligation to leave our children with clean air and clean water and clean soil. I'm a recreational fisherman. I don't have much time to do that now. That's okay. But I used to go out to the second and third island on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel--and those in the Second District know where I'm talking about--and when the stripers are there and they're running, well, it's a fun evening. I never want to catch a striper that has a lesion. I have a great passion to make sure that we meet the deep obligation that we have to the next generation of Americans to be proper stewards of the environment. What I so often disagree with, with my friends who would profess to love the environment more than I do-- which is something, frankly, I don't concede--is this: We are headed so often to the same place. Sometimes it's a matter of timing. Are we going to get there over 3 years or can we stretch it out over 10 to 15 so that we can give industry a reasonable time to adjust? As I've listened carefully to the administration and to my colleagues here on this proverbial other side, I think it, in some ways, can be boiled down to this: that there is this general debate taking place-- and I frame it this way--that the administration believes there is a role for the American entrepreneur to play in job creation, but its reliance is principally on government; its belief is principally in stimulus spending--that is, borrowing money to buy things through the government. I think the evidence of this is clear. The administration has doubled down in the jobs bill on a stimulus-driven mindset. Now, in sharp contrast, we, as Republicans, believe there is a role for government, a proper role for government, but our reliance is upon the American entrepreneur, the small business owner. When we wake up in the morning and when we go to sleep at night, we know that the key to getting through this, to unleashing the great potential of America, is the American entrepreneur, America's small business owner. Look, I applaud the President for putting forth a jobs bill, but let me share with you this: We've passed a lot of jobs bills. It's right here. And I want to take a moment--this may seem tedious, but we need to slow down and get our facts right. I'd like to cover, briefly, a summary of the 22 jobs bills that we have passed in this body with bipartisan support that are now stalled in the United States Senate. Now, as a new Member here, I have just found it incredibly frustrating that we have passed good bills, bills that I know would move our country forward in job creation, and they're met with this response from the Senate Majority Leader: Dead on arrival. Really? Dead on arrival? I think I learned in about eighth or ninth grade in a civics class that here is what's supposed to happen: The Senate passes its own bill or amends ours, and then we go to conference. That doesn't happen very often; very seldom. Here is a summary of the bills that we have passed in this body. I am very proud of my party in this respect. And when there are issues with our party, I'm quick to say that, too. And we'll cover those in just a few minutes when we answer the second question: What's wrong with this body? Let me read just a few of them here, Madam Speaker. H.R. 872, Reducing the Regulatory Burden Act. If you think through this, we are addressing individual lines on a financial statement, each one of which would give breath and life and hope to the American entrepreneur, saying, You know what? I really think I can do this. I'm going to go ahead and take that second mortgage out. H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011; H.R. 37, disapproving the rules submitted by the Federal Communications Commission; H.R. 1230, Restarting America Offshore Leasing Now Act; H.R. 1229, Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act; and H.R. 1231, which would have reversed the Offshore Moratorium Act. It goes on and on, Madam Speaker, on and on. These are good bills. I encourage Americans across this great land to take a look at what we are doing as Republicans in leading the way toward true job creation. I know we can get our country back to work. There are clear steps that we can take so that, when you get to the very bottom, this profit after tax equals a return on investment that is attractive, that makes folks want to put capital at risk. I want to cover one more thing before I go to that critical question of why our Congress is dysfunctional--taxation. I will just give you one example of how this is having a detrimental impact on our country. We have a wonderful manufacturer in Virginia Beach, part of the Second District, called Stihl. You may know them from their chain saws, a high-quality product. It's a beautiful, well-run, efficient plant that they have in Virginia Beach. And they shared with me, they said, Scott, look, we are competitive with our sister unit in Asia. We are competitive with our sister unit in South America that produces essentially the same parts and the same products. We are competitive on a cost-per-piece basis, but here's where we're not competitive. We are not competitive on an after-tax basis. Now, whether we like it or not, we are in a global economy. We are competing with countries around the world, not just with our neighbors here in North and Central and South America. We are competing with countries all across the world. So our tax rate, our tax structure has to move America in the direction of making America the best place to start a business and, particularly, manufacturing. Madam Speaker, this is the manufacturing base. The fact that we are producing less here in America, I believe that is the principal reason there's a shrinking of the middle class. And so we need to come together as Democrats and Republicans and independents and improve our manufacturing base. The 22 bills that I mentioned address that directly and head-on, and they should be passed by our Senate and then sent to our President for signature. Let's tackle that second question, Madam Speaker. Why is our Congress so dysfunctional? I believe there are three principal reasons. The first is the harshness of our tone. Both parties are guilty of this-- both parties. Let me give you an example on the Republican side of the ledger. I don't use the term ObamaCare because I believe it's pejorative. Right out of the get-go, it personalizes the debate. My objection to the Affordable Health Care Act has nothing to do with the President, himself. It has to do with what's in the bill. But when we use a term like ObamaCare, it is unnecessarily interjecting into the conversation an angle which so many in our country find divisive. I've spent a lot of time with our black pastors and bishops in the Second District of Virginia. What a joy it is to go across our great district and worship in different houses of worship and when I sit down with my good friends, our bishops and pastors principally in the black community, and we start talking about these matters, and they say, Scott, where are you on the Affordable Health Care Act? I say, well, pastor, I don't support it. Here's why. But you know I don't use the term ObamaCare. And they said, yeah. Often times they'll say, Scott, they see it as a racist term. And I don't speak for every black pastor in my district certainly. But I'll tell you, I've talked to enough to know that some do see it that way. Why would we use a term that unnecessarily alienates us from our friends and moves us apart as the American people? And I'd submit to you, Madam Speaker, that what's taking place in this body is hurting every American family. And if wasn't, quite frankly, I wouldn't be here. But it is. It's putting our country at material and serious risk. There's a harshness of tone. And I think the way to respond to that and head in a different direction is to think, well, what would your mom say? I know how my mother taught me to speak to others: with respect. And, Madam Speaker, I would say this: We should not mistake civility with weakness. We can and should be firm on principle. Civility is not an indication that one does not hold core values. Now, the second aspect of what's, I think, hurting this body and hurting every American family is this: the misuse and oftentimes the complete dismissal or deliberate failure to reference facts. I'm a businessperson. I don't know any other way to make a decision other than to first gather the facts. If I start making decisions off of how I feel or where I think the decision ought to go, I would not only not prosper; I would go into bankruptcy. And I think, in some ways, that's where we're headed as a country, because we're not relying on the facts. Let's take a couple here that just jump out at us. Now, I would say to my friends who are Democrats, let's consider this. Historically, we've been around 19 percent of expenses as a percent of our gross domestic product. Right now we're over 24.5 percent. This is putting America on a perilous course, and I believe it threatens our country in a fundamental way. Now, to my Republican colleagues, let's look at the other side. Historically, we've been around 18 percent, plus or minus revenue as a percent of gross domestic product. And right now we're less than 15 percent. That too is a problem. Any Republican who will not admit to this or confront it and discuss it head-on is not dealing with reality. These are the numbers. It's not how you feel; it's where the numbers lead us. We need to be a leadership team here, a body that respects, seeks out and is guided by the facts. My colleague, who I respect very much, Representative Schweikert, he was down here one afternoon. I was watching him on C-SPAN. I was in my office and watching him, and he had a wonderful presentation. And what he did was he put into perspective--it was sometime ago, probably 6 weeks or so, maybe 8--this debate that was taking place where there were some charges coming from our friends on the other side, and they were basically saying, you know, you're trying to crush Medicare on the backs of the poor, giving oil breaks to oil companies. And he did this. He kind of broke it down. He said, okay, we're borrowing about $4.7 billion a day. Let's look at all tax cuts for all Americans. If you eliminated every single one of them, it would be about 28 minutes out of that 24-hour day if every tax break was removed. And I'm certainly--you know, we'll walk through which ones we can support; 28 minutes of a 24-hour day could be addressed by these tax cuts. Tax incentives provided to oil companies amount to about 2.2 minutes under his calculation, and I'm quite confident in his math. So about 2.2 minutes out of a 24-hour day could be addressed by eliminating the tax cuts to oil companies. And the tax treatment for corporate jets, if you remember that discussion, is about 15 seconds of a 24-hour day. Yet, in this body, right here it was presented as either fix Medicare or eliminate these tax breaks, or hold on to them, rather. It was a false argument. I mean, you could agree to every single reversal, and we'd still be faced with an enormous, an enormous fiscal challenge. As we head into the days ahead, it looks like a ski slope. Our expenses look like a ski slope. Yet our friends on the other side would present it as, well, all you have to do is basically eliminate these tax breaks and, you know, kind of a no-pain option. So I think--and both sides do this. You know, you look back--I targeted my own party on the first point of harshness. You know, I could give examples in each category of each party. Now, questioning of motives here. This has been a most interesting experience as a new Member of Congress. I've sat in this body right here and watched my colleagues--Democrat colleagues--stand up and with great bravado say, you don't care about the poor. You don't care about the elderly. You don't care about our minority communities. Madam Speaker, how can one judge another's heart? How can one judge another's intent? I would say to my Democrat colleagues, you may care as much about our environment, but you do not care more. You might care as much about the poor, but you do not care more. You might care as much about ensuring that our seniors have medical coverage, but you do not care more. Indeed, that is why I voted for the House Republican budget. That is why I voted to ensure that we take the steps now so that Medicare is solvent. The President and I agree on this matter, that without changes in 9 years, we're bankrupt in Medicare. That's unacceptable. I think it took political courage for our party to put that on the House floor, and I think that's a good segue to this account that I have right here, this idea of questioning people's motives. I was on my way to a Veterans of Foreign Wars town hall with our fine veterans. I have the great privilege of representing, again, the Second Congressional District of Virginia. It has the highest concentration of veterans in the country. What an honor it is. So I'm on my way to a VFW breakfast meeting, and these good men and women get up early. I think it started at 7:30. I got a call from our district director. She said, Congressman, she said, MoveOn.org is here. I said, Okay. How many? She said, Oh, I think one or two. And I said, Shannon, there will be more, and don't worry about it. We pulled up there and the door to the entrance was quite far from where we were on the road. There was quite a distance in the parking lot. And there were a couple of protestors out there--I think by that time it was three or four--and I told my good friend Esmel Meeks who works with me every day, I said, Esmel, stop the car. He said, What are you going to do? I said, Esmel, it's okay. I just want to get out and talk and listen. I got out of the car, and I said, Good morning. I'm Scott Rigell. The gentleman said, I know who you are. I said, Look, I appreciate you being here this morning. I respect you for getting up early. You care about this topic of Medicare. You care enough to get out here and meet with me or at least send me a message. I said, What's on your mind this morning? I think that caught him off guard a bit. But as we went through the conversation, he said, Well, you're giving all of these oil subsidies and crushing Medicare. I said, Well, we've got something in common here. Let's talk about this. I don't believe in oil subsidies. I said, I'm looking at this matter right now. It's taking me a little time. It's a complex matter. There are several different areas of tax treatment for oil companies. I called in one of the most progressive groups in America to give me their take on this: Tell me why these are tax subsidies. And as I met with these young folks in my office--they were first a bit surprised that they found themselves in my office, but I was delighted to have them there. I said, Help me to understand why these are tax subsidies. There are a number of them, and they started to go down the list, and I almost immediately noticed a problem. I'm a businessperson. I've been in business 30 years. I said, Wait a minute. Some of these are just regular tax deductions that any business would get whether they were a mom-and-pop operation or a large corporation. Now, these over here, they sure look like tax subsidies to me, and if I determine that they are, I'll vote to repeal them on the House floor. And I went back to those that were not true tax subsidies, and I said, Listen, don't use hyperbole to make your point. It actually diminishes your argument. We got through that, and I shared a little bit of that story with this good gentleman from MoveOn.org that met me outside the VFW town hall. And then after that I said, You've accused me, or I should say, You're certainly taking a shot at me here for not caring about the elderly. I said, No, this is why I voted for the House Republican budget. This is the best way to ensure that we protect Medicare. I said, Do you know how long it takes us to balance the Federal budget under this plan that you say is extreme? He had called it extreme. I said, Sir, do you know how long it's going to be under the Republican plan of borrowing money each and every year? He said, No. I said, I do. It's 25 years. Under the plan that's called extreme, it's 25 years of continuous borrowing. And that's the boldest plan out there right now. At least it's gotten serious consideration. And of course that plan, too, sits in the United States Senate without action. In the Second Congressional District of Virginia, we are blessed with water. It's all around us. You can't go down a street for four or five miles before hitting beautiful water. And in those waters is one of the most precious and delicious little creatures known to man, the blue crab. And if you're lucky, you can put a couple of chicken necks in a crab pot, throw it in just about any part of the Chesapeake Bay or one of the estuaries in these little bodies of water and little creeks off of the Chesapeake Bay that we're blessed with in the Second Congressional District, come back in about 4 or 5 days, and if you're lucky, you'll have 10 or 12 blue crabs in there. If you pull the crab pot up on to the dock, as I've done many times, one thing is pretty striking about that. As you look at these crabs, they have no idea what their fate is. And they're just going at it. Claws are flying. Occasionally a claw will be severed and pinched off, but they just keep fighting. They are oblivious to their fate. If they had any hope, any hope at all, what they would say is, Hey, wait a minute. We're all in this together. This thing is not headed in a very good direction. And they'd say, Listen, our only hope is when this man opens up that little trap door, we all gotta rush him and maybe a few of us at least will make our way back into the water, maybe all of us. But our only hope is to do this together. Madam Speaker, I would submit to you that in more ways than we might imagine, we are like crabs in a crab pot. We're fighting each other; we're not making good decisions as a body, and it's putting us all at risk. I believe there is a deep resolve. Notwithstanding what I just shared, I believe there is a deep resolve among both parties. I trust and I pray that there is because the matters before us are so great that there is a deep resolve to do the right thing; to listen to each other; to treat each other with respect; to watch the harshness of our language and our tone; to bring back a civility in our public discourse; to let the facts guide us to good decisions; to not question the motives of others. This will bring us together. Yet we know that there will still be spirited debate. This is a good and natural thing. It has been a characteristic of this body since our very founding and even prior to the founding of this great country. There will continue to be spirited debate. How are jobs created? I have given you, Madam Speaker and others, my core belief on how jobs are created and how we'll unleash the greatest job-producing engine the world has ever known: the American entrepreneur. Some disagree with these priorities. I don't see how. I like my view. It's been tempered by 30 years of reality and experience. But if we come together under the terms and conditions and under the umbrella of civility that I just outlined, I really believe that we'll meet that deep obligation that we have to the next generation of Americans to pass on the blessings of liberty and freedom. I close with this, Madam Speaker: I shared with this body earlier that I had the great privilege of representing the Second District, which has the highest concentration of men and women in uniform in the entire country. My weekend was filled with wonderful events honoring our veterans. Young veterans and older veterans, like my father, Ike, at 88 years old, an Iwo Jima veteran--my favorite veteran, by the way. But as we walked through these events from parades and marathon races and just a host of different events, it was just evident to me that we have so much more in common that binds us together, the full fabric of our community. Every community, every minority community, every community, old, young, is represented in these wonderful events, our veterans, what they have fought for in this great country. And I believe the best way to honor our men and women in uniform surely is, of course, to stop on Veterans Day, to pause, to look them in the eye to thank them. But I would say even more importantly, and I think our veterans would agree, they'd say, You know, I appreciate that. But better yet, and indeed your duty, elected official and every American, is to take the legacy that was gifted and handed to you at a heavy price and ensure that we pass it on to the next generation. So I implore, Madam Speaker, every American to get engaged in this noble fight for the future of our country, for our children, and for our grandchildren. My favorite modern-day President, President Reagan, said it this way: Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We did not pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for and passed on for them to do the same; or one day, in our sunset years, we will tell our children and our children's children what it was once like in America where men were free. Indeed, we will meet our deep obligation to the next generation of Americans. And as we come through this Veterans Day, may God watch over our veterans, our troops who stand watch tonight, and may God forever bless the United States of America. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RIGELL

Mr. RIGELL. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 809, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''