Martha Roby

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. Absolutely. You know, when you talk to business owners, or at least when I have, you'll hear them say, but there was a time when regulators came into your business to try to make it more effective or a safer environment in which to work, but that time is long gone. Now the regulators are there to find problems and fine you. I want to give you one example that was astounding to me. A fellow that's in the construction business was explaining to me that he had a friend that's a roofer that had a $700 job, to make a $700 profit on a roofing job. His crew was over there at this home all day long, had the ladder, they were going up and down. After 5 o'clock, a regulator was driving down the road, pulled over and noticed that he was afraid the ladder didn't come over the eave of the roof just far enough to fit within the regulatory requirements. He stopped and wrote that fellow up to the tune of $8,000. A $700 job and an $8,000 fine. These guys had been going up and down that ladder all day. We all agree that not every regulation is bad, but this is an environment that has gotten out of hand; people with too much time on their hands and not coming into businesses in the spirit of helping businesses thrive.

Mrs. ROBY. Right. Let's just go back in time for a minute and talk about some of these other repeals. We have the Boiler MACT provisions, the Cement MACT, net neutrality, the regulating farm jobs. We can go down the list one by one by one and talk about the efforts that we have taken here in the House. With the strength of the numbers here, some of these have been with bipartisan support that we've passed these measures. And yet again and again and again, it's just time after time after time it's sitting in the Senate without any action. All you have to do is go look at the budget that the House has passed the past 2 years that Chairman Ryan put forth out of committee and came to the full floor. You mentioned the President's budget where there were zero votes--zero votes. We talk about offering solutions to the American people to look that small business owner in the eye and say, ``Yes, I am working for you; yes, I have a solution for you; yes, I have a way to get out of your way,'' which is what we've done, and our budget outlines very, very specifically what these solutions are. Our spending is out of control, which in turn, like you already mentioned, just takes it a whole other step that this Congress is not doing their job, and therefore the jobs are not being created by the private sector, period. It all comes down to that.

Mrs. ROBY. It's all businesses.

Mrs. ROBY. But the problem with our farming communities is that they are, in a lot of instances, they own a lot of land. So they have wealth when it comes to land ownership, but they may not have the cash. And so when the government comes along to tax the farm upon the death of a parent that wants to pass it down, they've got to sell the farm to pay the tax, and that's where our farmers lose out every time. And there are numerous other businesses throughout this country where they may be cash poor. They may have some assets but they may be cash poor, and so they end up having to sell it off in order to pay the government for that company's success.

Mrs. ROBY. You just add our lack of tax reform, which we so desperately need, and I know that we are committed to that here in the House majority. We do have a plan that we've set out as it relates to those reforms. We know that American businesses are faced with an unbelievably complicated and cumbersome Tax Code, combined, over 30 percent on businesses, not to mention the problems with the estate taxes. It makes the U.S. the second highest corporate tax rate among developed nations in the world. So the U.S. Federal rate is 35 percent. It's nearly 10 percentage points higher than our other competitors. That, on top of all of the other issues that we've highlighted. I mentioned the manufacturing jobs. I don't know about you, but I get this question all the time: Where have all the manufacturing jobs gone? People always highlight that we just chase these jobs offshore. And it's because we have created this environment in which business owners don't have a choice. If they're going to turn a profit, they have to do what is the benefit for their family to make that hard-earned dollar. I remember hearing a colleague give an example. He was sitting on an airplane next to a guy that made things. He made things, he produced a product, and he wanted to make them in the United States of America. But when it came down to it, the bottom line--he thought he was going to open his plant right here, but when it came down to it, they hadn't taken into account the corporate tax rate and the difference between that and the next country where they could manufacture his product. That sealed the deal. They are not manufacturing in the United States because of the environment in which we have.

Mrs. ROBY. I was going to say in June for the first time in 44 months, small businesses cited taxes, taxes above poor sales as the single most important problem that they are facing today. Taxes.

Mrs. ROBY. You know, to use the President's words again, because these are direct quotes, so let's look at a couple of things. Last April, President Obama said, ``We have to live within our means, we have to reduce our deficit, and we have to get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt.'' That was the President just last April. But also I want to make sure that there is no misunderstanding. This is the President's own words in February of 2009: ``I am pledging to cut the deficit by half by the end of my first term in office.'' And I know we are kind of circling back to how we began this hour tonight, but since the President has taken office, our national debt has increased by $5.3 trillion.

Mrs. ROBY. Well, your son can attest to that because he's 10 months old and already owes, his share is, what, $51,000 at 10 months old. You know, we both have young children and this is why we are here. We're here for them because we want this country to be as great for your children and mine and all America's children and grandchildren and generations to come. And quite frankly, it is horrendous that we would leave this situation on their backs. We keep hearing about balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class. How about spending massive amounts of taxpayer dollars on the backs of my children and my children's children. This is where the future of this country is dependent, and if we don't get serious about this now, why wait? Why are we waiting until November? Why is the leadership in the Senate waiting until after the election to take on problems that are serious now? As you said before, the clock keeps ticking up. The debt keeps accumulating between now and November. It's not like the 16 trillion is just some arbitrary number. I mean, it's a huge number, but it doesn't stand still. It's going to continue to increase. As I explained when I am in town halls about the debt ceiling, the debt ceiling is like calling your credit card company and saying to your credit card company, ``I need you to increase my credit limit because I don't have any cash to pay you the interest on what I already owe, on the debt I already owe.'' That's where we are. And that's on the back of Margaret and George and your children and all of those other children and grandchildren of Americans. As you can tell, as a mom it makes me upset, and that's why we're here. Republicans in the House majority have taken action on a number of things that have already been mentioned tonight: we've repealed the government takeover of health care. Ride down the road in any district in this country and talk to a small business owner about that, and you will find out very quickly that they're either going to be close to being out of business or they're going to go out of business completely if this law is fully enacted. We have stopped massive tax increases here in this House that one independent analysis said could destroy more than 700,000 jobs--you highlighted that earlier. We have replaced these indiscriminate spending cuts from sequestration with commonsense solutions by calling on, again, our friends in the Senate whose budget reconciliation--it's hard to do that if you don't have a budget--but through budget reconciliation, through commonsense cuts instead of just across the board, and rein in this wasteful government spending. And with the 30- plus bills that you and I have highlighted some portion thereof in this discussion tonight that are sitting collecting dust in the Senate, all 30 of these jobs are job-creating, energy-producing bills that are sitting in the Senate collecting dust.

Mrs. ROBY. Well, and you will see, again, further action from leadership here in the House on that, calling on the President to outline exactly what this is going to look like. And like you said, he hasn't. It's just one more on the list of uncertainties for job creators. I see our colleague and our friend, the gentleman from Kansas, has joined us. Certainly feel free to jump in here.

Mrs. ROBY. The only thing that we all can agree on is that the only thing that is certain is that uncertainty; and to hear the consistency in all of our experiences back home, it's astounding to me why we cannot--why the President and the leadership in the Senate cannot see this, because if they're really listening to the same Americans that you and I are listening to, they would hear the same message that we've brought to the floor tonight. Mr. Speaker, the choice for the President and the Senate is very, very clear. It's either political paralysis that leads to certain economic catastrophe, or bipartisan leadership that puts us on a path towards prosperity. And I would just ask that they keep in mind a few people. Remember who this economy has hit the hardest. You've heard stories tonight in this hour of those business owners that have said just that. Remember the moms at the grocery store that are trying to put food on the table for their family or gas in the car to get to their one or maybe two jobs. Remember the young people, the recent graduates that we've talked about that can't find a job; and half of them in the class of 2012 are unemployed and they are drowning in debt. All of these groups, all of these groups, they deserve leadership out of Washington, not lip service. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. ROBY

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

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Major General Anthony G. Crutchfield, Commanding General of the United States Army Aviation Center of Excellence, upon completion of his tour of duty at Fort Rucker. Since August 2010, when Major General Crutchfield took command of the United States Army Center of Excellence and Fort Rucker, he has demonstrated a deep personal commitment not only to his troops, but also to their families and the surrounding community. Major General Crutchfield's mastery of the area of Army aviation is well known, and his vision for the future of his branch has had a direct positive impact in the Army. But, equally important, Major General Crutchfield's well-known dedication to his soldiers is, perhaps, his most honorable attribute. Further, his devotion to the success of his soldier's training, performance, and morale illustrates his proven leadership among those who dutifully serve. When Major General Crutchfield took command of Fort Rucker, there was an untenable backlog of would be pilots waiting to begin training. As one of his first directives, he challenged his staff to find a solution to this vexing problem. Despite counsel from many that this was an unreasonable task, the backlog has been eliminated. Such actions exemplify his ``can do'' attitude. The entire Army Aviation community has benefited as a result. Always thinking about military families, Major Crutchfield would not accept that, despite the growing population on base, Fort Rucker was not scheduled to receive a new commissary until 2016. Through his efforts, Fort Rucker and its families will enjoy the benefits of a new commissary in 2013. However, this pales in comparison to his other efforts in support of military families. As an example, Major General Crutchfield would often participate in story time with children of deployed family members. To think that a man of this magnitude would make time in his busy schedule to spend with the children of deployed soldiers, on more than one occasion, speaks volumes about his genuine concern for his military families. It also says a great deal about his character as a man. Major General Crutchfield has also built solid relationships with the Fort Rucker civilian community throughout his command. He took time to meet members of the community, and worked hard to get to know them personally. Most recently, after undergoing a coaching change at Enterprise High School, Major General Crutchfield spent some time with the football team and offered a motivational speech to those young adults. Such actions are typical of his efforts to bond with the community and will have a lasting effect on those student athletes for years to come. Major General Crutchfield's tour as Commander of the United States Army Center of Excellence and Fort Rucker is a textbook example of our great military leaders. From his dedication to his troops and their families to his unwavering support of the local community, his leadership and commitment to excellence contributed significantly to our nation's defense. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the United States Congress, I am pleased to recognize the significant impact Major General Crutchfield has had on Fort Rucker and the surrounding community. My congressional staff, my husband Riley, and I each offer Major General Crutchfield and his wife Kim our most heartfelt gratitude for their service to our Nation and wish them fair winds and following seas as they move on to their new duty station at Camp H.M. Smith in Hawaii.

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3803, the District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, of which I'm a proud cosponsor. In sitting here listening to debate, I want to get a few things straight. First of all, I am a woman, and I have not declared war on myself. Second of all, this is not a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. This is a direct challenge to cruelty to unborn children. Currently, the policy in D.C. legally allows abortion for any reason until the moment of birth. Mr. Speaker, Erin and Blake Hamby, a couple from my home State of Alabama, were pregnant with their second daughter when Erin had complications at 22 weeks. And at only 25 weeks and 2 days, their little baby, Faith, was born on January 8, weighing only 1 pound, 14 ounces, but every bit the same baby as my own children, Margaret and George, who were born full term. Faith spent 2\1/2\ months in the NICU, and both she and her parents struggled daily, but that tiny baby--that tiny baby--is now 6\1/2\ months old and thriving. In the District of Columbia, Faith could have been aborted not only at the point at which she was born, but also any day up to the day of her birth. H.R. 3803 prohibits abortions in D.C. after 20 weeks' gestation, a time frame based on scientific evidence that the unborn child can experience pain by at least at this stage of development. In June of 2011, Alabama became the fifth State to pass a similar measure by banning physicians from performing abortions after 20 weeks. I applaud my home State of Alabama in its admirable fight to protect human life, such as Faith's when she arrived earlier than expected into this world. I am proud to vote in support of H.R. 3803 tonight, and I encourage my colleagues to join me.

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. I thank the gentleman from Colorado and the other Members that are here tonight to talk about the Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act that we will be voting on here in the House this week. Earlier this month, President Obama commented in a speech: If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. President Obama has even talked about how excessive regulation hurts job creation saying that: Sometimes rules have gotten out of balance placing unreasonable burdens on business, burdens that have stifled innovation, and it's had a chilling effect on the growth of jobs. This is straight from this President's and this administration's mouth. Even as recently as February of 2012, The Economist put out this, ``The Over-regulated America.'' This is not a secret that we are talking about here tonight. This is something that is clearly well established. And if any Member of Congress has taken, as I know many have, the time to travel throughout their districts, as we all do, to meet with business owners, small businesses, medium-sized businesses or even large businesses, they will tell you that they are not creating jobs because they are overregulated. And I have used example after example on this very floor where I have met with the private sector, with these businesses, and they've said we had to reinvest all of our capital into just making sure that we are dotting the I and crossing the T, when all of that capital could be reinvested in creating jobs. So what we have on this floor this week is a series of bills. I know Mr. Quayle from Arizona is here to talk about his incorporation in this bill, but there are seven different ideas incorporated into this one bill that is going to ease regulations in this country on businesses in different ways. I think tonight, as the gentleman from Colorado has already suggested, we can have a real frank discussion, because this is about being honest with the American people. I get asked the question, as I'm sure all of you do, what are you doing? What is Congress doing? Well, this is what we're doing. And why our friends in the Senate, for the life of me, I do not understand, nor do the people I represent in southeast Alabama understand, why Mr. Reid and those in the Senate will not take up these very bills that will remove the heavy hand of government and unleash the private sector's ability to create jobs in this country. I look forward to continuing this conversation, and thanks for letting me be here.

Mrs. ROBY. Just to jump in real quick, have you heard from your employers back in the district where you go and you do these site visits and they immediately tell you not just how overregulated they are but how excited the regulators are to come into their business and write them up for things they have never done before? In the past, these regulators have been ambitious to help job creators to correct situations that may be unsafe or a dangerous situation for the employees. But, now, instead of providing employers an opportunity, there are fines after fines after fines that are just putting more of a burden on these very people that want to take their capital and invest in job creation. I hear it everywhere I go.

Mrs. ROBY. I would love to add to the out-of-whack statement because I have a few examples here. I don't know if you have agriculture in your districts, but the farmer that is having to deal with duplicative permitting processes or concerns over the Federal Government making them regulate dust on their farm. As one of our colleagues said, last time she checked, if you drive a pickup truck down a dirt road, it's going to generate dust. But we're regulating that. That's what the Federal Government is regulating. Not to mention ObamaCare or the pulp and paper industry--which we have a lot of in my district--concerned about the Boiler MACT regulations that are so costly, the gas station owners that are worried about EPA requiring that their gasoline have certain percentages of ethanol mixed into their fuel or they have to pay a penalty, or the chicken hatchery farmer--now, this is a good one that happened last week. We had a chicken hatchery farmer that called our office just last week about a new regulation that will require keeping his eggs at a certain temperature to go to processing to make dried eggs to avoid salmonella. Well, here's the kicker. And this is just to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the overregulation. On the surface, this makes sense because we want to protect America's health. But this same regulation, this very same regulation, is letting the grade egg farmers that do have potential salmonella in their facilities send their possible contaminated eggs to the same processing plants. Processing eggs for dried eggs and other products kills the salmonella that would potentially be in this product. The FDA is allowing possible exposed eggs into the system. So why should a hatchery farmer, who only sells to this type of processing when they have extra eggs be forced to put it all in a sort of refrigeration process that has nothing to do with the prevention that the regulation says that it's trying to prevent? And the answer is overregulation. This is just another example. I like eggs. I fixed some scrambled eggs this morning for breakfast. This affects me. It affects all of us in our lives, in our homes, in the grocery store. When I buy milk for my kids, I see the costs increasing because of these very regulations. Whether it's the EPA and the ethanol in the gas or these actual very specific regulations that have to do specifically with the product being sold, we all are affected by this. It's costing jobs, and it's costing the American taxpayer to have to spend dollars that are unnecessary.

Mrs. ROBY. I would even add to that and say that I've had business owners in my district who have lodged complaints about what we talked about before, this punitive regulation, but they don't want you to go to bat for them because they're afraid it's only going to end up costing them more and that then their businesses will become targets of this Federal Government. Now, what kind of United States of America is that when we have businesses that are afraid to complain to their Representatives in Congress about exactly what you're talking about? ``Hi, I'm here. I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'' Then you complain about it, and you get targeted as a business.

Mrs. ROBY. If you talk to the Greatest Generation, you know that is not what this country was built on.

Mrs. ROBY. To quickly add to that, in the Dodd-Frank Act, there are 36 rules implemented, and it will grow to the 400 required under that act. That goes to your point exactly.

Mrs. ROBY. Didn't you have the opportunity to question a witness on your committee and ask very specifically as it relates to energy? If I watched the hearing correctly, you were unable to ever get really until the final admittance that, in fact, they do not take economic impact into consideration when instituting these regulations.

Mrs. ROBY. What do they take into account?

Mrs. ROBY. Without the input of the private sector that is actually impacted by the very regulations.

Mrs. ROBY. Wouldn't that be a novel idea? Just real quickly if I may. We've now stated on more than one occasion some quotes from the President and this administration going back to the fact that if you've got a business, you didn't build that. Then, as the gentleman from Colorado just read again, the President said that these rules have gotten out of balance. Mr. Griffin in his op ed he wrote in support of his amendment. I'm just going to make sure we give the gentleman from Arkansas some credit since he's not standing here with us. He also points out at the end of this opinion piece that the President admitted in his State of the Union address, ``There's no question that some regulations are outdated, unnecessary, or too costly.'' And I just want to read that again. ``There's no question''--this is the President, this President, President Obama--``There's no question that some regulations are outdated, unnecessary, and too costly.'' Yet every single time in my short tenure in this House of Representatives that we have brought a bill to the floor to deregulate, to do away with unnecessary regulations so that the private sector can grow, we are blocked in the Senate, and the President is not there to support us.

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, once again, President Obama displays his lack of leadership and refuses to take charge in order to avoid the forthcoming devastating ramifications associated with sequester. That's why I enthusiastically agreed to cosponsor H.R. 5872, the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012. For months, the House Armed Services Committee has repeatedly asked DOD and OMB for specifics of how sequestration would be implemented and its impact. In response, we have received nothing. Once H.R. 5872 is implemented, the President will be forced to forgo his laissez-faire approach to crisis resolution and will be required to report to Congress the details of the administration's plans to implement the budget sequestration cuts. He will be forced to include an estimate of the sequestration percentages and amounts necessary to achieve the reduction for both defense and non-defense categories. Of course, the impact on our military personnel and their families cannot be overstated. Frankly, it's inexcusable that these men and women who sacrifice so much for our Nation should suffer through these uncertainties while Senate Democrats and the White House refuse to offer a specific proposal to fix the sequester. As such, I urge Senator Reid to take this bill up immediately.

Mrs. ROBY

Mrs. ROBY. I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act, of which I am a proud cosponsor. Of course, on March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the largest health care overall in the history of the United States. Sadly, it is less about providing quality health care for all citizens and more about expanding the scope of Federal Government. The law failed to address the number one health care concern that families and employers have, and that's cost. As I've been sitting here and have listened to the debate, under the individual mandate, each individual absolutely will be penalized or taxed--we'll call it a tax because the Supreme Court did--if in America--this free country--that person chooses to remain uninsured or to purchase health care that is not government-approved, and this is regardless of one's income. Despite the Supreme Courts's ruling, a significant number of Americans continue to oppose ObamaCare, and they are encouraging Congress to take immediate action. Americans and their doctors, not Federal bureaucrats and politicians, are in the best position to determine which health care options best meet their individual needs. Regardless of the Court's decision, many problems within the law remain present, many of which have a significant impact on small businesses. The American people do not want a one-size-fits-all health care system that imposes numerous mandates, regulations, and tax hikes on employers and employees. This will be devastating not just to my home State of Alabama but also to the Nation. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to improve our health care system by implementing market-based reforms that actually lower costs, increase access, and maintain a high quality of care for all Americans. I urge my colleagues to listen to the voices of the American people and to support H.R. 6079.