Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 151 provides for a modified open rule that allows any Member to offer an amendment to the underlying bill as long as it is preprinted in the Congressional Record and complies with House rules. This rule continues to build on the commitment of the Republican majority to consider legislation in a more open, honest, and thoughtful way. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying bill. This legislation was introduced by my dear friend, the gentleman, the chairman of the Republican Conference, Jeb Hensarling, on February 28, 2011, and marked up in the Financial Services Committee last week on March 3. This legislation went through regular order, which included committee hearings prior to a markup and making the text of the legislation publicly available for Members and the public to review prior to consideration in the committee and on the House floor. The chairman of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California, David Dreier, has once again provided Members of this body a transparent and accountable structure under the rule we are debating and discussing today, allowing Members of both sides of this aisle and of this body to offer amendments and to join in the debate of the underlying legislation. H.R. 836 repeals the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program and rescinds and permanently cancels all unobligated funds. It directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to conduct a study to determine the extent of usage of the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program by covered homeowners, which includes members of the armed services, veterans, and Gold Star recipients. Lastly, it requires the Secretary to submit the report to Congress, including the results of that study and identifying any best practices that could be applied to the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program for ``covered homeowners.'' The Dodd-Frank Act established a $1 billion Housing and Urban Development Emergency Homeowner Loan Program, which provides loans or credit advances to unemployed borrowers who cannot pay their mortgages to make mortgage payments for a period of 12 months, with a possible extension. These loans increase the amount of the homeowner's indebtedness, or the borrower's indebtedness, so that a borrower who is unable to pay back either the original amount of principal or the additional loans made under the program would quite probably be worse off in the long run. These borrowers derive no benefit from the program and the government will suffer the losses from their eventual defaults. That's the way the program was set up by the Democrat majority. Continued government intervention and questionable use of taxpayer dollars only prolongs our current economic crisis and ensures that the housing market will continue to struggle. The market needs to find its own footing free of government intervention and manipulation so that we can get on with a full recovery. The deficit is expected to reach a record $1.65 trillion this year, while our national debt is well over $14 trillion and growing rapidly. As a matter of fact, growing so rapidly that last month a $230-plus billion as a deficit for 1 month, the largest in the history of this Nation, was recorded. Yet what do we hear out of the White House? Spend, spend, spend, including against this bill that they have offered to veto because it would save some money. The U.S. simply cannot afford to loan billions of taxpayers' dollars that will not be repaid. The Obama administration in its FY 2012 budget proposal estimates that this program will have an almost 98 percent subsidy rate. That means for every dollar spent, the government is expected up-front to lose 98 cents. On every dollar of this program, the government right up-front is expected to lose 98 cents. Mr. Speaker, no wonder Republicans are trying to go back and look at the programs, the massive spending programs, not only by President Obama and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi but also the committee chairmen and those who brought these measures to the floor that have had a stunning impact on the economy of this country. Also, HUD regulations set up a process where the bridge loan can be forgiven over a 5-year period. This is irresponsible. It is irresponsible not only now; it was irresponsible at the time it was passed by this House, passed by the Senate, and signed by the President. This is not a loan program, but another government welfare program. Job creation is the most effective foreclosure prevention tool. Job losses--rather than unsustainable mortgage terms--are now the driving force behind foreclosures and mortgage defaults. The government does not need to be adding additional debt obligations onto borrowers who are already struggling with their current commitments, particularly when doing so adds to the debt burden of every single American, including those who took out these loans who have to suffer through the process as they are seeing their use of a government program that provides not only more debt for the country but tremendous strain on themselves. Government was not there to help. They were there to indebt the American people. Congress should focus on job creation, not welfare and giveaway programs. This is the best way to prevent more foreclosures and to get our economy back on track. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that enacting H.R. 836 would decrease Federal budget deficits by $840 million over the 2011- 2021 period. My colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand the current dire emergency that we are facing with the state of the U.S. economy and that American families are struggling. Why should the government go and make matters worse? It is our job as Members of Congress and as legislators to ensure that the policy which is passed by this House has integrity and can be backed up by the full measure of a free enterprise system instead of a government backstop. It is that government backstop that Republicans objected to then and object to now. We need to make sure that our greatest days lie in our future, not the government handing out checks because the government didn't mind the blank check that it originally satisfied itself for in this legislation. We should be creating opportunities. We should not be holding back Americans from earning not only the opportunity for potential in their future but also for making their life better. Eliminating this program will save taxpayer dollars and encourage more responsible government spending by the Federal Government. Mr. Speaker, this was an unwise program, and today Republicans are on the floor of the House of Representatives to say we can do the right thing today. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the underlying legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, you know, I'm shocked at our friend after friend on the Democratic side who say ``no jobs bill,'' ``no jobs bill.'' But my friends also recognize what the American public does, that we voted, literally the first vote in this House, to overturn what is known as ObamaCare, the massive government takeover of health care in this country that would result in a loss of 800,000 jobs. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority does have a jobs bill, and that is to go and rescind what the Democrats have outrageously done and that is to put this country in a diminished position not only with us being competitive overseas but also for us diminishing American jobs. No, we're not going to go and do a, quote, jobs bill to add jobs. We're trying to simply go back and save the jobs that are being lost today and would be lost by wasteful government spending, huge government bureaucracies, and so my friends on the other side simply want to come and attack us. Well, the Republicans have it, and so do the American people. We are going to stop the outrageous spending. We are going to attack the rules and regulations which are killing not only business but losing jobs all across this country. We, as Republicans, are going to stand up and say $4 gasoline is outrageous, Mr. President; work on the things from your administration that you are doing that ruin jobs, that make sure we have higher gas prices at the pump, and do those things that would help the American people. The Republican House majority is one-half of one-third of the body, and we are one-third of government. We are trying to do the things that the American people sent us here for. We are all about trying to reduce wasteful government spending. We are going to take on the laws that have been passed by this President and the former two sessions of Congress that were outrageous spending, tax increases, an assault on employers, making it more difficult for the American people to have freedom and diminishing our future. So every time one of our Democrat friends goes and says there's no jobs bill by the Republicans, the American people will get it. The Republicans first have to save the jobs that are at risk today; 800,000 net free enterprise system jobs that--if we do not overturn ObamaCare that was passed by this body on March 22, a year ago, we're going to lose even more jobs. So the most immediate thing we're doing is trying to reduce wasteful government spending, to try and do away with and attack rules and regulations that will kill the jobs that we have, and to make sure that we're telling the American people that this spending spree that we're on causes a massive deficit, a hemorrhaging by this government, including last month $230 billion we overspent. Then we're doing our job. If we are doing those things, we're trying to save the jobs that we've got. Mr. Speaker, that is what the Republican majority is about. We're not going to let the Democrats get us off our game. We understand what they want. They want to talk about, well, we can look at doing back to some of the spending, but when it comes down to it, they can't pick anything they really will support. Everything is a sacred cow. Everything that we do is a problem if you go and touch it. Mr. Speaker, the Republican Party, the Republican majority, led by Speaker Boehner and our majority leader Eric Cantor, is all about trying to get back to an America where we have a balance, to where we don't lose more jobs, where we don't add more debt, and we stand up for the American people. That's why we're the new majority party. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SESSIONS. You asked if somebody who knew the answer would stand up. I don't know the answer, but what I will tell you is that we will have the taxation start, and yet, the plan kicks in 2014. So massive taxation will start, and then we will find out what happens.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I stood up and openly said I have no clue how many jobs have been added. But the million-job figure that the gentleman quotes is not a net figure. It's not a net figure. We have lost many, many, many times what we have gained. And the net figure means that when you add in what has been added versus what was lost, this country is in trouble. And I think the American people understand this. They understood it last November. They understand it now. People are scared. They're scared about their future. They're scared about their job. They're scared about how much gasoline is going to go up. They're scared about whether the EPA is going to come put some more rules and regulations on them. They're scared about what will happen in the long run with their job and health care. They see the diminishment of freedom. They see where we are in trouble not only in our own homes; we are in trouble with our country. They see that we ran a $230 billion deficit last month alone. They see where this administration is incapable of looking at facts and factors and making a realistic choice about, now that we understand what's happening, what are we going to do when we're in trouble. The Republican Party is here, and we are not going to be knocked off our game. We're going to go and try and save as many jobs as we can from the onerous rules and regulation, the excessive taxation, and perhaps worst of all, the inattention to try and create a better circumstance for this country. So that's what we're going to do. We're going to go after and we're going to repeal this ObamaCare. We're going to stay after the rules and regulations, and we're going to make sure that the middle class of this country has a chance to save the job that they have rather than diminishing it. You have seen, Mr. Speaker, all across this country the States who are in the most trouble have top-to-bottom Democratic-controlled legislatures as well as Democrat Governors. Those States are unwilling to make tough choices. They're unwilling to do the things which would say ``no'' to constituencies who are special interests. Today, the Republicans are on the floor of the House of Representatives, and we're saying not only ``no'' to special interests, but what we're trying to say is that we need to use common sense and balance. And I recognized 14 years ago when I came up here that common sense is not common in Washington. But today, part of that common sense takes place with, we're going to read the bills before we vote on them; we're going to go through regular order; we're going to relook at the things which have been passed which diminish jobs and which harm our economy. And those are the things which are on the floor today. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud of our Republican majority. I'm proud of our Speaker, who's from the great State of Ohio, who understands himself, personally, because of the State where he is from, that the State of Ohio is in need of leadership, real leadership, in Washington, DC, just as the rest of the country. And so the Republican Party stands on the floor of the House today. We are about jobs. We're about reducing wasteful Washington spending, and we're going to stand for common sense. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to inform the gentlewoman from New York that I have no further requests for time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, the facts of this case state very clearly that this Nation is being overrun; it is being overrun by too much taxing, too much borrowing, too much spending. Just last month, we hit a record deficit, $223 billion. This is unacceptable. The status quo of where we are moving is not acceptable. With the debt looming at $14 trillion and unemployment hovering across the country at 9 percent, and much higher in many areas of the country, including congressional districts that are hurting even more, and I understand this because those who first lose their jobs many times are disabled people and I understand disabled people and their plight that they have also and it is sad, and it hurts us as Members of Congress and it hurts the American people. The American people asked Congress to rein in the spending and do something about jobs, and that is what we are doing. We are not making excuses; we are getting the job accomplished. Eliminating this program will save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. By gaining control of government spending and eliminating wasteful Washington government spending and handouts, the private sector can gain some confidence in the economy and start investing in jobs and a brighter economic future. I applaud my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), for bringing this legislation, and to the chairman of the Rules Committee, the young chairman, David Dreier, favorite son from California, San Dimas, California. David comes here and so ably runs our Rules Committee for us. We thank them for providing an open and transparent process. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on the rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Robert Morris, a dedicated community and home building industry leader. After graduating from San Diego State University, Mr. Morris became actively involved with builders associations--first, serving as a volunteer with the Building Industry Association of San Diego and then joining the staff as the Director of Membership and later on as the Executive Vice President. Mr. Morris' strong belief in community service was emphasized shortly after his arrival in the great State of Texas in 1994. He sought and gained opportunities to become involved with various civic organizations, serving on boards such as the Fannie Mae Dallas Advisory Council and the North Central Texas Customer Advisory Board. With his extensive experience and passion for the building industry, Mr. Morris established his presence as the Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the Home Builders Association (HBA) of Greater Dallas. In this role, Mr. Morris also qualified for two home building industry professional designations, the Certified Aging in Place Specialist (CAPS) and the Certified Green Professional (CGP) and continued to expand his knowledge by participating in the National Association of Homebuilders Officers Council Excellence in Learning Program. The HBA and the industry greatly benefitted from his vision, extensive experience, and wealth of wisdom. Mr. Morris has received numerous awards and honors, including the prestigious Texas Association of Builders' Presidential Service Award and the Seldon Hale Lifetime Accomplishment Award. I know his dedication and leadership will be greatly missed at the HBA. I wish Bob and his wife, Pam, all the best in their future endeavors. Mr. Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in congratulating Mr. Morris on his retirement and his many achievements in the home building industry.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 128 provides for a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 662. This rule provides for ample debate and opportunities for Members on both sides of the aisle, the majority and minority, to make sure that they have ample time to participate, come to the floor, and express their ideas, which is what this new Republican majority is enabling Members to do. I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying bill. The underlying legislation is a simple extension of service transportation programs through September 30 of this year. This legislation was introduced by the distinguished chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Chairman Mica, on February 11, 2011, with Ranking Member Rahall as an original cosponsor. It was reported out of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure by a voice vote on February 28, 2011. This legislation went through regular order with bipartisan support. This is a clean, straight extension of current law, providing a hard freeze at 2009 spending levels through the end of this fiscal year. Without this legislation, the spending levels would expire on Friday, March 4, 2011. In an effort to provide more transparency and accountability of how this body has been run, which is different than how this body has been run for the past 4 years, the Republican Conference adopted a policy that would no longer permit extensions of programs on a continuing resolution or any other appropriations bills. This allows Members a straight up or down vote on an issue at hand and, in this case, it is surface transportation. The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011 continues the authorization of Federal highway, transit, and highway safety programs through the end of this fiscal year at the same program funding levels established for fiscal year 2009. This authorization is essential to allow funds that had been included in transportation appropriations legislation to flow to States and local transit agencies. We are not trying to get in the way of decisions that need to be made locally; we are simply trying to make sure that they are legally executed. Should this straight extension of transportation funding not be signed into law before the March 4 deadline, the impact would be severe and immediate. A shutdown would result in immediate furloughs and suspension of payments to States, which would hamper the Federal Highway Administration's ability to pay contractors. This would jeopardize the States' transportation funding to a tune of $154 million a day, killing ongoing projects, things which had been agreed on and are being done locally. This level of funding was extended by the previous Congress six times starting in October of 2009. Continuing this funding at 2009 levels allows for the appropriate funding for States to complete and manage their transportation projects. With an extension through the fiscal year, it will allow the new chairman of the Transportation Committee, my dear friend, the favorite son and gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) the appropriate time to hold necessary hearings to review and re- estimate the funding essential for States to carry on their transportation projects. The Congressional Budget Office, which is also known as the CBO, has concluded that the underlying bill today does not affect direct spending or revenues. Further, the CBO determined that, ``the nontax provisions of H.R. 662 contain no intergovernmental or private sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal governments.'' Additionally, according to the Department of Transportation, surface transportation allows for international trade, which helps sustain and create jobs that support our national economy. The data reported in the past 10 years says that U.S. surface transportation trade between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, has increased 48.6 percent, a 13.8 percent increase in the past year alone. In December 2010, imports were up 41.9 percent compared to December 2000, while exports were up 57.7 percent. Currently, this trade is valued at $66.5 billion annually. In an ever increasing global market, the United States needs to ensure that our surface infrastructure can sustain the tremendous growth rate of trade so that we can maintain international competitiveness, create jobs and encourage economic growth in the United States of America. Once again, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. I applaud the Republican leadership for following regular order for the bipartisan nature of this bill, for Republicans and Democrats working together through the entire process, and up to and including the gentleman, Mr. Dreier, the chairman of the Rules Committee, extending an unusual amount of time so that every single Member has an opportunity to come to this body and not only voice what they believe is important to them but also the time where they can come down and speak to important matters of this Congress. The chairman and ranking member continue to work together to provide a necessary extension that will get us through the rest of the year, and I look forward to an open and transparent process for the reauthorization for next year's funding also. I have confidence in not only Chairman Mica, but also John Boehner and Eric Cantor, as they lead this House of Representatives on transportation issues, to do what's right for a beautiful country that expects Congress to have an open and transparent process that is good for all Members. I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying bill. December 2010 Surface Trade With Canada and Mexico Rose 13.8 Percent from December 2009 (State Rankings in Tables 5 and 7) Trade using surface transportation between the United States and its North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) partners Canada and Mexico was 13.8 percent higher in December 2010 than in December 2009, reaching $66.5 billion, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (Table 1). BTS, a part of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration, reported that the value of U.S. surface transportation trade with Canada and Mexico fell 2.2 percent in December 2010 from November 2010 (Table 2). Month-to-month changes can be affected by seasonal variations and other factors. Surface transportation consists largely of freight movements by truck, rail and pipeline. In December, 84.8 percent of U.S. trade by value with Canada and Mexico moved on land. The value of U.S. surface transportation trade with Canada and Mexico in December was up 12.6 percent compared to December 2005, and up 48.6 percent compared to December 2000, a period of 10 years. Imports in December were up 41.9 percent compared to December 2000, while exports were up 57.7 percent (Table 3). U.S. Surface Transportation Trade with Canada U.S.-Canada surface transportation trade totaled $39.8 billion in December, up 12.2 percent compared to December 2009. The value of imports carried by truck was 17.7 percent higher in December 2010 compared to December 2009, while the value of exports carried by truck was 10.4 percent higher during this period (Table 4). Michigan led all states in surface trade with Canada in December with $4.7 billion (Table 5). U.S. Surface Transportation Trade with Mexico U.S.-Mexico surface transportation trade totaled $26.8 billion in December, up 16.3 percent compared to December 2009. The value of imports carried by truck was 16.3 percent higher in December 2010 than December 2009 while the value of exports carried by truck was 18.7 percent higher (Table 6). Texas led all states in surface trade with Mexico in December with $9.5 billion (Table 7). The TransBorder Freight Data are a unique subset of official U.S. foreign trade statistics released by the U.S. Census Bureau. New data are tabulated monthly and historical data are not adjusted for inflation. December TransBorder numbers include data received by BTS as of Feb. 16. The news release and summary tables can be found at http:// www.bts.gov. More information on TransBorder Freight Data and data from previous months are posted on the BTS website at http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/. BTS will release January TransBorder numbers on March 29.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 128 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Carlsbad, California (Mr. Bilbray), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. SESSIONS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I enjoy my colleagues coming to the floor and talking about us being without a vision and that the people will perish. People are perishing all across our country because of the excessive spending that this administration and the previous two Congresses have placed upon the people. Excessive debt. This year, the President has estimated we will have a $1.650 trillion debt. And as best I can tell you, some sense of reality and dose of discipline must be invoked upon this Congress. That's what we're attempting to do not only by this bill today but by also following regular order, by allowing Members of Congress to come and speak very clearly on the floor, by allowing an open process, things which were never allowed in the previous two Congresses. I appreciate Members coming to the floor and talking about what's in the best interests of the country. Madam Speaker, the bottom line is that the Republican majority is going to do something about jobs. We're going to do something about spending. We will bring discipline, authority, responsibility and actions directly to the floor of the House of Representatives as opposed to spending which was out of control, ideas which ran amok, and a lack of vision and clarity for our future. I'm very proud of what we're doing here today. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I will say that this process that we have had as opposed to having it just mixed in a resolution allows for a motion to recommit for the gentleman and his party, and it is my hope that they will take up that open process that we talked about where we'll see what their ideas are. In a few minutes we'll find out when they make that choice. Madam Speaker, we've heard a lot of things during this debate, up to and including about thoughts and ideas about shutting down the government, that that looms ahead of us. Not one Republican, not one Republican, is talking about shutting down the government. It is an issue that Republican leadership, including the gentleman Mr. Boehner, the Speaker of this House, has openly talked about that we will do every single thing that we can do to avoid a government shutdown. So it's my hope that this body would recognize, we're not offering that as a threat to the American people. We're open for doing business. We're trying to make sure we not only address this issue weeks ahead of time but that we're forthright about how we would go about giving options, opportunities, how we would work with the President and the Senate to make sure that we avoid this from happening. Secondly, we heard about a vision statement, a vision statement that evidently is lacking now from Republicans. Well, the facts of the case are very simple and, that is, the vision that our country sees ahead right now is diminishment of jobs, of a free enterprise system that is overburdened by rules and regulations, a policy that comes from this administration that is about destroying jobs, whether it be from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission or, government-wide, an assault on the free enterprise system and upon employers. So what we are trying to do is to offer some reassurance today that we will go ahead and reauthorize the Surface Transportation bill and that there will be the understanding that the gentleman--the fabulous chairman of the committee, John Mica from Florida--will, in fact, lead in a bipartisan effort with Ranking Member Rahall to provide the opportunity to make sure that there is public involvement, that open hearings are held, that we in committee talk about this, and that every Member is given a chance to participate. That is what Republicans are now willing to do: regular order, open processes, and a chance to make sure, as they find their way here to the floor, that every single bill we want, where possible, allows for a Democrat motion to recommit. Madam Speaker, you heard me say earlier today that my Republican colleagues and I are committed to an open process and to far, far more accountability, transparency, and an open process than what our friends have ever allowed us for the last 4 years. Today's legislation is a step in the right direction. The underlying bill has bipartisan support, even up at the Rules Committee, where Republicans and Democrats support this underlying legislation. It went through regular order, which is a structure which worked, and open debate on the floor. This is just the first step in the necessary transportation funding--an open dialogue with the American people, cities, States, counties--and it is essential that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee takes the time to review where it is and to come up with the recommendations in allowing for a future that will be even brighter and better. Allowing this funding gives the States the tools that they need. We are working, as Chairman Mica is, with counties, cities, States, and with elected officials all across the country. The hard work that he is doing pays off again today. I will predict that we will pass this rule and this bill on a bipartisan basis because of the way our Speaker, John Boehner, our majority leader, Eric Cantor, and also the great chairman, John Mica, insist on making sure that the floor is run with openness for the body. I look forward to working with Chairman Mica and the rest of the committee on that endeavor. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Private Barney F. Hajiro, Medal of Honor recipient. On January 21, 2011, Private Hajiro passed away in Honolulu, Hawaii at the age of 94. Barney Hajiro was born in Hawaii in 1941 to Japanese immigrant parents. Shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Barney was drafted into the U.S. Army. In 1943, he volunteered to join the 442d Regimental Combat Team composed of second-generation Japanese-Americans and was then sent to Europe to fight the Germans in Italy and France. While fighting in France, the 442d Regiment was called upon to rescue the Texas 36th Division that had been cut off and surrounded by Germans for over a week, earning its nickname the ``Lost Battalion.'' Private Hajiro and his comrades encountered a dangerous and challenging undertaking as the German troops relentlessly fired at the American soldiers from uphill. When ordered to attack, Barney fearlessly charged ahead up the hill, later referred to as ``Suicide Hill'' towards the heavily fortified enemy position, exposing himself to intense enemy fire, while constantly taking aim at multiple enemy strongholds. He fearlessly met fire with fire and single-handedly destroyed two machine gun nests and killed two enemy snipers. As a result of Private Hajiro's heroic actions, the attack was successful. Private Hajiro's extraordinary heroism and devotion to duty are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon him and the United States Army. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our deepest and most sincere gratitude for the service of Private Barney Hajiro, and honoring the memory and lasting legacy of this brave and selfless United States soldier. May we all strive to be as bold and as dedicated servants of our country as Private Barney Hajiro.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Freese and Nichols, an engineering, architecture, and environmental science firm, and the recipient of the prestigious 2010 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in the small business category. Overseen by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, the Baldrige Award is the highest level of national recognition granted to organizations for performance excellence. Since its establishment in 1987, 86 organizations have received this prestigious award. Freese and Nichols, Inc., FNI, traces its historical roots in Texas back to 1894, and has always been dedicated to the spirit of innovation. FNI's emphasis on approaching projects with a fresh and unique perspective allows them to push the boundaries with avant-garde solutions and to stay at the forefront of their field. From designing the first ever LEED certified building to their restoration projects to being conscious of their impact on our environment and striving to make the world a better and cleaner place for future generations, their commitment to responsible and sustainable development is evident. Their community service efforts and partnership with nonprofit organizations speak loudly of their belief in giving back and being good stewards of our local community. I commend Freese and Nichols for their dedication to innovation and performance excellence; they are truly deserving of this great honor. Mr. Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in congratulating Freese and Nichols.

Mr. SESSIONS

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

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise this morning to offer an amendment to H.R. 1 which would decrease the amount the Federal Government subsidizes Amtrak by $446,900,000. In 2008, the Pew Charitable Trusts Foundation performed a study of Amtrak's services. According to that study, the 20 most egregiously inefficient train lines run annual deficits between $4.9 million and $59.4 million per year, with many operating at a 100 percent loss. My amendment would decrease the spending authority to Amtrak by the amount equal to those lines' losses. Mr. Chairman, in 1997, Congress passed what was referred to as the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act which required that Amtrak operate without any Federal assistance after 2002. By the way, that was 8 years ago, Mr. Chairman. It has never reached the intended level of self- sufficiency. It is time that Congress stop supporting these failed rail lines. It is important to the taxpayers of this country, Mr. Chairman. Instead, by eliminating these very inefficient and seldom used lines, Amtrak can focus on its core competency of urban and suburban transportation. For example, the Acela line which operates along the northeast corridor continually operates in a self-sufficient manner. We need to shift Amtrak's focus to the things that it does well, not the extremely inefficient long-distance line it fails to operate within the budget. Mr. Chairman, Amtrak has proven to be a money-losing venture that the government can no longer sustain and support. In 2008 alone, Amtrak lost $1.1 billion. At a time of record debt and deficit, this amendment stops wasteful spending and directs the entire $446,900,000 to the spending reduction account to help pay down the debt. We must operate within some sense of business operation of common sense. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment to reduce Federal spending. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SESSIONS. I find it very interesting that we are going to continue operating the service which costs the money, but if I took the money and stopped the service we all of a sudden can't fix all the things that you want to fix. My gosh, the bottom line is they need to quit operating the service and then use it for what the gentleman says they should use the money for, of the bridges and the operating of the infrastructure.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the chairman of the Republican leadership.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, the cynicism on the part of the Democratic leadership is interesting. It was just announced yesterday that the Obama health care plan will net lose America 800,000 jobs. But it's also true that it will create millions of jobs, but it destroys millions more, a net 800,000 jobs. The Republican Party is here because of the miserable failure of the Democrat leadership in this House of Representatives and our President who has ruined millions of jobs in this country, and that is why the Republican Party is here to do something about that. Don't worry, we'll be adding millions of jobs. Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Scott), a freshman member of the Republican leadership.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), a member of the Republican leadership.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the favorite son of the State of Illinois (Mr. Roskam).