Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize T.C. Marsh Middle School's Army Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) and Corporal David Bates on their winning the National Middle School Drill Championship for the third time. Corporal David Bates has led the JROTC program for the past eleven years. He has taught them the importance of personal responsibility, discipline, commitment, and hard work. Under his leadership, T.C. Marsh's JROTC has taken the prestigious title of National Champion three times in the past four years. After spending countless hours practicing their drills, the cadets were ready to compete and capture the national title once again. In addition to practicing daily, cadets also garnered the support of teachers, families, friends, and the local community to raise $12,000 to help cover the cost of equipment and travel expenses. They are the essence of discipline, dedication, and hard work. By working together, the cadets have developed a mutual respect for each other and honed their leadership skills. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of the JROTC and Corporal David Bates on their well-deserved victory. I commend them for their dedication and hard work and I wish them all my very best.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Glenn A. Adams, the current President of the National Eagle Scout Association (NESA). Since taking over as NESA President in 2008, Glenn's dedication and leadership has strengthened the organization through innovative outreach efforts and a variety of events, expanding the community of Eagle Scouts. On April 29, 2010, his hard work will be recognized when he receives the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award (DESA). Since it was first introduced in 1969, the DESA is given to an Eagle Scout that has shown distinguished service in his profession and community for a period of at least twenty-five years. Glenn is most deserving of this great honor and prestigious award for all he has done for NESA and Scouting. His active involvement is notable; he serves on the Longhorn Council Boy Scouts of America (BSA) Foundation Board and as a Committee Member of the National Scouting Museum. He was also the former Scoutmaster for Troop 326 and has made generous financial contributions dedicated to providing scholarships for deserving Eagle Scouts. Glenn has always led by example and his active involvement in his local community speaks loudly of the impact he has had. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in recognizing Glenn for all he has done for the Boy Scouts of America and join me in congratulating him as he receives this prestigious award.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Glenn A. Adams, the current President of the National Eagle Scout Association (NESA). Since taking over as NESA President in 2008, Glenn's dedication and leadership has strengthened the organization through innovative outreach efforts and a variety of events, expanding the community of Eagle Scouts. On April 29, 2010, his hard work will be recognized when he receives the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award (DESA). Since it was first introduced in 1969, the DESA is given to an Eagle Scout that has shown distinguished service in his profession and community for a period of at least twenty-five years. Glenn is most deserving of this great honor and prestigious award for all he has done for NESA and Scouting. His active involvement is notable; he serves on the Longhorn Council Boy Scouts of America (BSA) Foundation Board and as a Committee Member of the National Scouting Museum. He was also the former Scoutmaster for Troop 326 and has made generous financial contributions dedicated to providing scholarships for deserving Eagle Scouts. Glenn has always led by example and his active involvement in his local community speaks loudly of the impact he has had. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in recognizing Glenn for all he has done for the Boy Scouts of America and join me in congratulating him as he receives this prestigious award.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Major Jon. M. Lauder and his dedicated service to this great Nation. After graduating from the Virginia Military Institute with a degree in Civil Engineering in 1994, he has served on active duty with the United States Marine Corps. He proudly served two combat tours in Iraq, including the initial assault into Iraq in 2003 as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. After a combat tour in Eastern Afghanistan as a part of Operation Enduring Freedom, Major Lauder served as a U.S. military observer in Israel during the summer of 2006 during the Israeli- Hezbollah war. He is currently the Commanding Officer for the Marcie Corps Recruiting Station in Dallas, Texas. On May 14, 2010, Major Lauder will be turning over his command and will move to Washington, D.C. for his new assignment at the Pentagon. It has been my distinct honor and pleasure to work with him. I proudly call him my friend and know that Major Lauder's dedicated service has made our Nation a safer and better place. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in expressing our heartfelt gratitude to Major Lauder. I wish him and his family all the best.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize T.C. Marsh Middle School's Army Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) and Corporal David Bates on their winning the National Middle School Drill Championship for the third time. Corporal David Bates has led the JROTC program for the past eleven years. He has taught them the importance of personal responsibility, discipline, commitment, and hard work. Under his leadership, T.C. Marsh's JROTC has taken the prestigious title of National Champion three times in the past four years. After spending countless hours practicing their drills, the cadets were ready to compete and capture the national title once again. In addition to practicing daily, cadets also garnered the support of teachers, families, friends, and the local community to raise $12,000 to help cover the cost of equipment and travel expenses. They are the essence of discipline, dedication, and hard work. By working together, the cadets have developed a mutual respect for each other and honed their leadership skills. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in congratulating the members of the JROTC and Corporal David Bates on their well-deserved victory. I commend them for their dedication and hard work and I wish them all my very best.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman, the chairwoman of the Rules Committee, for extending me time on this FAA Reauthorization Act. Mr. Speaker, this may not come as a surprise to you or Members of this body, but once again we are here to discuss a bill on the floor that has come to the floor under a closed rule. We continue this process in this House of Representatives despite the promise from the majority that they would lead this floor with open and honest and ethical debate and, once again, this is neither open, and I do not believe it's an honest process if Members of this body are shut out day after day after day after day after day in the Rules Committee, Republicans and Democrats, who cannot come to this floor as a result of the Rules Committee action that we took yesterday. They are not even opening this process up to the Members. I think it's bad for this body, I think it's terrible for the Rules Committee and, even worse, I think, to extend the expectation that we would be open on this floor is a misnomer, and it has been for almost 4 years now. This Democrat majority has not allowed for one open amendment process this entire legislative session, not one, not one, Mr. Speaker, and that's unprecedented. Last week, as we were up over the weekend Saturday in the Rules Committee for the important health care debate, Members came to the Rules Committee the entire day with over 80 Republicans amendments, presenting ideas, ideas that they had, some which were outstanding bills and some which were small and minor fixes. Yet at the end of the day, before we voted on Sunday, gleefully the Rules Committee majority, including our chairwoman, gleefully announced all 80 Republican ideas were defeated, all 80 Republican ideas were slam dunk in the Rules Committee. All 80 Republican ideas that Members came to express themselves up on the floor, slam dunk, and gleefully the bill was held as is, no additional outside comment necessary, Democrats have it down. This has happened day after day, bill after bill. We are here, Republicans on the floor of the House of Representatives today, saying, again, that's not right. That's not the way to run this ship, this is not open, and this is not the process that should be followed. So I guess that when the Speaker promised we are going to be the most open, the most honest, the most ethical Congress, I don't think she was referencing how she and our chairwoman would be running the Rules Committee or the legislation on this floor. Not only is this rule closed, but it allows for martial law authority, meaning that whatever the majority wants to do, they can do on this floor, all the way throughout the weekend, all the way into Monday. The Rules Committee continues to shut out Republicans, our ideas, and to circumvent the rules that this committee has traditionally had simply to pursue an agenda. I believe last weekend, as thousands of people were outside trying to have their voices be heard, once again, this body did not listen to them and rejected their pleas, which really begs the question, I think, would the majority each time a bill comes up for consideration eliminate the amendment process from the debate? Is that what they are afraid of? Are they afraid to debate these? Are they afraid to have Members like the gentleman, Mr. Mica, come and present his ideas, ranking member of the committee, a gentleman who has spent lots of time working with people to make this bill better? What are they afraid of? Are they trying to protect their Members from tough votes? Are they afraid of the process? What is it that continues this process with not one open rule this legislative session? Oh, by the way, we are in the second session right now, this is the second year. Today's closed rule is all about the Federal Aviation Administration, known as the FAA, and this is their reauthorization act. This bill would reauthorize the FAA for 3 more years. While U.S. air travel plays a fundamental role in our economy, and making safe provisions, a cornerstone of this legislation, is important, yet there are controversial provisions, including cost increases for passengers, excessive spending and labor negotiations, and job losses. Today I would like to talk about those parts of this bill that were not amended, do not allow for Member contest, for amendments. Keeping up the tradition of Democratic Party spending, this bill authorizes $70 billion over 4 years. This is a historic level of funding for the FAA, which should come as no surprise from this Democrat-controlled Congress that has already set record levels of deficit and spending over the past 4 years and, once again, aiming for a $1.6 trillion deficit this year, $200 billion worth of deficit last month alone. This legislation reiterates the 1998 labor agreement between the National Air Traffic Controllers Association and the FAA. This is a terrible precedent to have Congress interject itself in a current labor dispute, especially when it is on the back of the American taxpayer. According to CBO, this agreement is going to cost taxpayers $83 million this year and over $1 billion throughout the 4-year reauthorization. This bill puts funding for other important safety and air traffic control modernization programs at risk. Forget the negotiation--we will just take care of that here on the floor of the House of Representatives. Additionally, this legislation directs the FAA to conduct biannual inspections on all foreign repair stations. This completely disregards the bilateral safety agreements and invites foreign retaliation that threaten 130,000 American jobs at service stations. Mr. Speaker, why does this Democrat leadership continue to bring bills to the floor of the House of Representatives that threaten American jobs? We should be all about ensuring that American jobs are taken care of, not putting them at risk. We have seen record unemployment over the last year. As a matter of fact, in the last year since President Obama has become our President, here in several months, we have doubled the amount of people who are unemployed in this country. More and more people are out of work every day directly because of the political agenda and will of Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi on this floor of the House of Representatives with votes of Democratic Members. Americans want jobs. We want a pro-growth strategy. We want to make sure and should be on this floor talking about being competitive with the world, not here trying to satisfy union concerns and raise taxes and diminishing more jobs and putting them at risk. Despite the record unemployment and the 130,000 jobs this bill currently threatens, it goes one step further by invalidating all antitrust immunity grants to airline allowances 3 years after enacting their contracts. This will hurt U.S. carriers' competitiveness and threaten another 15,000 jobs. Mr. Speaker, why would we want to become less competitive with other foreign nations? Why would this Congress want to place America in a defensive position against the things which have strengthened Americans' relationship with other countries and ensured, not just that we would get along, but American jobs in the process. This legislation also increases the Passenger Facility Charge, known as the PFC for those of us who are regular travelers, up to $7 per flight. That is a 56 percent increase from the current allowable $4.50 per flight charge. At a time when our airlines, not unlike all other areas of this economy, are struggling, we are now going to stick it to those who are flying to pay for these boondoggle expenses that I believe this Congress is creating. While the FAA says the fees are important to fund FAA-approved projects to enhance safety and security, what it's really all about is being able to pay for this union contract. You know, these projects also include things like bike storage for passengers that are laid out in the bill, bike storage for passengers on airlines. I don't know about you, but I don't know how many passengers who bike to the airports with their luggage, but that's what we are going to do. We are going to go and make bicycle areas available at airports. That's just a lot of money, and it's a lot of wasted money that does not make sense at a time when we should be making tough decisions, not adding to the expense that is required at every airport in this country. This reauthorization does very little to improve our Nation's air traffic control modernization program, known as NextGen. Despite concerns and growing congestion in our Nation's airspace, the bill does not provide a dedicated funding source, does not establish an air traffic control modernization board, and does not provide NextGen with needed borrowing authority, authority to be prepared for our future. Without proper funding and oversight, NextGen will fail to properly deploy the congestion in U.S. airspace, which is reaching critical levels, to ensure the safety areas are fully adopted to. This legislation does include the bipartisan bill H.R. 3371, the Airline Safety and Pilot Training Improvement Act, that passed the House of Representatives last year. This is a step in the right direction for the future safety of airline travel, ensuring our pilots have the appropriate screening and training that is necessary. Over a year ago, Mr. Speaker, the President promised that unemployment would not reach 8 percent. Over 3 million Americans since then have lost their jobs. That was a promise. We have now reached a 10.2 percent record unemployment rate and continue to hover well above the 8 percent that we were told would be the margin. Congress needs to stop the record spending, needs to focus on creating jobs, not diminishing them, as this bill threatens 130,000 jobs today. Mr. Speaker, I believe we have the ability to make progress in Congress, create jobs, and grow the economy. America should be called the ``Employer Nation,'' and, instead, this Congress fails to understand how jobs are formed through investment and reinvesting within businesses in this country. We should work with the investor and the free enterprise system to become the global leader. We should not rely on governments to pull us out of this economic stumble that we are in. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, who is the ranking member of the Aviation Subcommittee, Mr. Mica.

Mr. SESSIONS. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. I once again would like to thank the gentlewoman for the time she has extended to us. And I appreciate the gentleman, Mr. Mica, for being here today on the floor. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate that the House is operating an unprecedented restrictive rules process, once again, continuing the 4 years, into our fourth year of this very interesting process to deny Members the opportunity to come and to place their ideas on this floor, to debate their ideas, and a chance to vote on them. I think it is a bad way to run the House. Every time a rule is up, we get to say, Well, brand-new record. Brand-new record here for the House of Representatives. I think you heard the frustration that came from a gentleman who has devoted his life, not only his career, to the transportation infrastructure areas of this country, but also the FAA and a lot of initiatives and ideas that he wishes he could have been a part of to make this better. But, once again, our friends on the other side of the aisle refuse to work with the Republicans. They refuse to allow amendments or even a motion to recommit, and then given themselves martial law, same-day suspension authority, and other circumventing activities just to get their job-killing agendas through this House of Representatives. If it weren't just job killing, it would be simple for the American people to understand, but it is also record taxing and spending. Big Government. Big Government, empowering government-types of rules and bills on this floor. And we oppose that. If we continue to borrow, tax, and spend down this pathway that the Democrat majority has that we have been pursuing since 2007, we are going to keep finding that not only do we keep losing jobs, but our country functionally will be broke. Not just broken, but bankrupt-type broke. We are noncompetitive, and we are doing nothing to create competitiveness around this world. As a matter of fact, we are trying to play hardball with other countries. No wonder this President is seen, and America is seen, in the world's eyes the way that we are. We are told that others diminished America's reputation, but what we are doing here today is just another opportunity to go stick our finger in the eye of our friends around the world. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed. We heard the gentleman from Florida say he is outraged. All we can do is that which is given to us. We will vote ``no.'' We will vote ``no'' on this rule. We will vote to try and gain some opportunity to where we can have balance back on this floor, and we will continue to stand up and talk about how we would like for this country to be an employer Nation. We would like to have this Congress aim at its business and what it does, instead of part-time or summer jobs; full-time jobs, employment, and opportunity for the American people. We would like to see this Congress take on the opportunities to say that we recognize that the way we will have jobs is by lowering taxes and giving investors an opportunity, a chance to place their hard-earned money into the free enterprise system where jobs can be built and grown, an opportunity not to have the three largest political agenda items that this Democratic Party, this President Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi stand for, three major political items that would net lose this country 10 million jobs. This last weekend as we were up in the Rules Committee, we were talking about the diminishment of jobs or the guess of diminishment jobs in this health care bill, and I stated what I believe was factually correct: around 4\1/2\ million jobs would be lost. And one of my Democratic colleagues yelled back, It's only 3 million jobs--only 3 million jobs are expected to be lost by this health care bill. That is 3 million American jobs today that we are knowingly, willingly, voting to say, That's okay. We don't care about those jobs, because what we want to do is to take care of some 25 million people who do not have insurance coverage and are underinsured on health care today, and yet remaining another 25 million that are out there. The cost-benefit ratios are staggering from this Democrat majority. It is staggering what we are doing to the free enterprise system, to families, to jobs, to people who want to have an opportunity to have a job, the dignity to take care of themselves. It's staggering to me the amount of debt, the amount of spending that takes place from this Democratic House of Representatives. It's staggering to me to see that this leadership and the votes that are made on this floor of the House of Representatives day after day are from our past and perhaps our future. We don't even care if we read the bill. We don't care about the process. We care more about our political agenda, a political agenda about making government bigger, about bankrupting this country, about taking jobs from American people, about the cavalier nature in which this is done. And then we look at the opportunity as we go through the bill to see that this health care bill, and other bills like we are having here today, simply empower other people, bigger government: 16,000 new IRS agents will be hired simply to make sure that this health care bill is enforced. It's these kinds of questions, Mr. Speaker, which Republicans and I believe others are raising about the leadership of Barack Obama and the leadership of Nancy Pelosi; and yet we look up and see day after day the votes that are on the floor. Don't even worry about reading the bill. Let's just get this done: this is why we are having problems in this country. We should open up the process. We should have open, honest, ethical debates. We should be willing to accept Republican ideas. We should not be gleeful when, Well, we reject it. Eighty Republican ideas. Job well done, Democratic team. Let's slam-dunk those Republicans. Let's not allow their ideas. Mr. Speaker, for this country to work, and to work properly, it's going to take all of us working together, not just the Democrat majority because they have the votes to slam-dunk Republicans. We believe process is important. We believe ideas are important. We believe that the Republican Party has lots of ideas that we will continue to stand up for. We are an alternative party and we will continue to show up every day faithfully for the American people; faithfully to say that we believe in not only freedom and opportunity, but we believe in the free enterprise system and people to have the dignity of jobs. And we are going to fight these job-killing Democrat ideas. We're going to fight these taxes and the spending that takes place, and we will make sure that the American people understand this is just another chance today to put America further and deeper into debt. It makes us sick to our stomach when we have to have Members who come and say, I was shut out of this process. No wonder I'm going to vote against this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, in Texas we have a law that's called the deceptive trade practice. And if this were being done in Texas, it would be against the law, because this is deceptive, what we are talking about here today. What is being sold is deceptive. We're hearing about the 35 million Americans that will be covered, but the other 23 million that will not be covered, they are not talking about. And secondly, they are not talking about the $500 trillion worth of physician reimbursement that is not included in this bill. And if people think you've got insurance or you can change insurance just to give everybody coverage, if you don't have a doctor to go to who can be paid for, then you won't get time to see the doctor. Mr. Speaker, this is deceptive what is being put on the table here today. The gentleman said call him a radical. I will. He is a radical.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Sam H. Pack, one of the most influential leaders in the American automotive industry on thirty meritorious years of service. Mr. Pack began his career in the automotive industry with Ford Motor Company. After his eighteen year tenure, he moved on to become the President, General Manager, and Partner of Lee Jarmon Ford, Inc., a dealership in Carrollton, Texas. In 1986, Mr. Pack purchased sole interest and as owner, the dealership has experienced continued growth under his leadership. The many loyal customers he has gained over the years can be attributed to his commitment to excellence and belief in quality customer service. His entrepreneurial spirit, business savvy, dedication, and hard work can be seen in his many successes as the proud owner and President of Sam Pack Auto Group. Aside from his successful career, Mr. Pack firmly believes in giving back to his local community. His monetary contributions to numerous philanthropic organizations has touched the lives of many and helped nonprofit organizations more effectively achieve their mission. Beyond giving financially, Mr. Pack also gives generously of his time and effort. He is actively involved in various civic and professional organizations such as the Metrocrest Chamber of Commerce, North Dallas Shared Ministry, Episcopal Diocese of Dallas Children's Foundation, National Automobile Dealers Association, and the Dallas New Car Dealers Association where he currently serves as the Chairman. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to joining me in honoring Mr. Pack. I wish him and his family all the best and congratulate him as he celebrates the 30th Anniversary of Sam Pack's Five Star Ford.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate A.K Mago on receiving the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award. On January 9th, the Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award was presented to A.K Mago for his outstanding work which has enhanced India's prestige in the United States. He is the first recipient of this award from the Houston Consulate Jurisdiction, which covers Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award is the highest honor conferred on overseas Indians. The award is presented by the President of India as a part of the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas Conventions, which have been organized annually since 2003. Recipients of this award have made significant contributions towards a better understanding of India abroad and have supported India's causes and concerns in a tangible way. Additionally, the honorees have made significant contributions in the welfare of the Diaspora, philanthropic and charitable work in India and abroad, and in building closer links between India and its Diaspora in the economic, cultural, and scientific fields. Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in expressing our congratulations to A.K Mago for receiving this high honor.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Ebby Halliday Acres as she celebrates her ninety-ninth birthday today. Ebby has truly made a lifelong impact on the Dallas community and real estate industry through her many entrepreneurial and philanthropic endeavors. Ebby Halliday Realtors was founded in 1945 by Ebby and her beloved husband, Maurice Acers. Their company began with only fifty-two homes in North Dallas, and has since grown to become one of the largest privately owned residential real estate firms in the country. Success for Ebby Halliday is not simply a result of her hard work and entrepreneurial spirit. She is notorious for the personal care and attention she gives to her employees, agents, and buyers. She has received numerous awards recognizing her professional success over the years. To name a few, Ebby received the Horatio Alger Award in 2005, the Visionary Award from Foundation Fighting Blindness, and the Linz Award in 2008. Ebby is also celebrated in the Dallas community for generously donating her time and efforts, as well as significant financial support, to numerous philanthropic endeavors. St. Paul Medical Center, United Way of Metropolitan Dallas, and the Communities Foundation of Texas are only three of the many nonprofit organizations and causes that have been personally touched by Ebby's love for her community and dedication to making the City of Dallas a better place. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our heartiest congratulations to Ebby as she celebrates her ninety-ninth birthday. May we all strive to match Ebby's passion for improving our communities and her unwavering commitment to success.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding the time. Madam Speaker, the Republicans in this body are in a quandary again today because of the way this bill was brought to the floor, and I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Houston, Texas (Mr. Culberson) to ask some questions.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I do appreciate the gentleman--and I am extending my words to him at this time. I do appreciate the gentleman, Mr. Oberstar, for being available to come down to the floor, but that is not the process. The process is the gentleman should have been upstairs at the Rules Committee. There was not one person available on behalf of the majority to come up to the Rules Committee to explain the bill. An explanation of, ``Well, none of this is new,'' is an inadequate explanation to the American people and to this body, and the Speaker should be embarrassed. This is not open. This is not, I believe, ethical, because the decisions were made and there was no discussion. I believe we are calling into question, Republicans are calling into question today about how this House is being run. And I do appreciate the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and, in fact, I admire him a lot. Despite its being only perhaps 15 or 18 pages, that is an inadequate explanation. This House should not stand for it. The Members of this body should say we will not tolerate this. And I am deeply disappointed once again. Madam Speaker, I yield such time he may consume to the ranking member, the gentleman from San Dimas, California. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, the gentleman said it best about this bill: Nobody even really knows what's in it. There was no general discussion. There was no one made available to come to the Rules Committee to answer questions. There were no committee hearings on this. This isn't the way to run this House, and it's not just Republicans that are down saying this. It's Members of the majority party also. It is this kind of unthoughtful and unprofessional conduct that is being put off on this body to where Members don't even know what's in the bill, have not had the time. And once again, Republicans are down saying it's not open, it's not honest, and certainly not ethical. I would like to yield 3 minutes at this time to the favorite son of Winterpark, Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, there is an answer to the gentlewoman from Texas, which is to vote against this rule. Vote against this rule. Then become a part of the process for the things which you would hope, would expect, and would want to be in the bill so at least your feedback can be accepted. We've been told now that the Senate is the problem, but the problem is this House, Madam Speaker. The problem is the way we are doing things. The gentleman Mr. Oberstar said, Yes, we've been waiting for months to get this from the Senate. We took 2\1/2\ minutes upstairs this morning--not one hearing, not one person who represented the Democratic Party who would explain what is in this bill. Now we are down on the floor, trying to figure out what is in the bill, getting it just hours ago. This is a flawed process. Madam Speaker, hearkening back to February 5, 2009, over a year ago, in the CQ article, `` `Regular Order' Will Prevail in House After Stimulus Is Complete, Pelosi says,'' the article reads, ``Speaking at House Democrats' annual policy conference, Pelosi said in her opening speech, `Of course we will go forward under regular order. We now have a large majority and a President who will sign legislation.' '' It's not happening. It's not happening again today. It did not happen even after February 5, 2009. We should be embarrassed, but as the old saying goes, beatings will continue until morale improves. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Bainbridge Township, Ohio (Mr. LaTourette). Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, you know, we have heard all this before, and it is not working. The bottom line is what this Democratic leadership and this Democratic President are proposing is not working, and that is why we are back at the well, so to speak, again. Over and over and over again we have a bunch of people that want to claim, ``Oh, we know how to get this done. Look at what President Clinton did.'' That was a Republican House of Representatives. Those were free market ideas. That was encouraging this country to be competitive. That was doing things that would encourage America and American business to go hire people. The three largest political items of Speaker Pelosi and President Barack Obama have lost this country 10 million net jobs. No wonder American business is not hiring people. They are getting things jammed down their throat. The President of the United States when he was a candidate talked about all the great things that could be accomplished, and since the President has been in the White House, he has done nothing but call people names, pick on them, belittle them, bully them, and then turns around and wonders why we have no jobs, why his agenda is not working. It is obvious why it is not working, because it is not made to work. It is made to bully the free enterprise system. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentlewoman for asking. I appear to have one additional speaker plus myself.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, if I could inquire of the time that remains on both sides, please.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I want to reiterate that this House of Representatives is made up of 435 Members who take time every week to come here to Washington. Perhaps they live here, but they still come to work, I believe, with a sense of obligation and duty, all 435 of us, to be fully participatory and to be a part of a moving body and a process that should work for the American people. We are now in our fourth year of leadership that denies the American people and the Members of this body an opportunity, I believe, to even participate; not just fully participate, but to participate. This bill that is on the floor again today is an example of a process that is very deceptive, because our friends, the Speaker and the Democratic leadership, talk about being open and honest, and yet the bill is here today with just hours' notice, with no one up in the Rules Committee on behalf of the Democrat leadership even explaining what is in the bill. I believe, again, the American people will reject this kind of leadership when the American people want to be engaged and Members of Congress want to be engaged. So, today, Republicans are going to ask that we reject this, and we should reject this, because we know that Republicans have better ideas. At this time I yield to the gentleman from Ohio, the Republican leader (Mr. Boehner).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I believe that our Republican leader, John Boehner, has said it very clearly, and that is that the way we are operating is not in the best interests of this House, the institution, or the Members. We have heard lots of colleagues on the other side cut down and argue about this isn't even a job bill because it is not even going to create jobs and how inefficient it is. But until this Democratic leadership agrees that they want to be open, that they want to be honest about what is in the bill, and that they want to be ethical about how decisions are made, Republicans are going to keep coming down to this floor. Many times I have argued openly in front of our Rules Committee chairman, Louise Slaughter, and said, Please know that the Republican Party wants to be better at our job, not as loyal opposition, but as an alternative party, and you do not even allow us an opportunity to know what is in the bills. It is ridiculous. We find ourselves in the role of asking questions, making statements, and doing things that, to the American people, look awkward and, quite honestly, unprofessional. I lay at the feet of the Speaker of the House and the Democratic leadership and my great Rules Committee chairman, Louise Slaughter, once again a request: If you want this body to have a chance to not look unprofessional and perhaps stupid, like we don't know what we are doing, and to gain back some trust of the American people, you have got to open up the process to where we as Members of Congress are able to come down with an educated opportunity to understand what is in the bill, to engage our colleagues on a professional basis, and to be able to thoughtfully talk about the content of the bill. This is an embarrassment. It is an embarrassment that after we heard a year ago that we will start going through regular order now, we are still not doing that, that Members of Congress cannot even see the bill hours before they read it, nor do we know the content because nobody came to explain it. It is wholly inadequate to people who are back home, Madam Speaker, to expect their Member of Congress, who comes up here 40 weeks a year to represent people, to be told we don't even know what is in the bill. I encourage a ``no'' vote. I encourage a ``no'' vote on this rule. I will say once again to my friends that are Democrats, if you want to read the bill, if you want to open up the process, your vote is the one that will make it happen. Don't blame that on somebody else. I have said it over the years. If you want to read the bill, then vote ``no'' on the rule. If you are perfectly happy with the process that is happening, go ahead and support this rule. But don't go back home and tell people, well, you know, I really didn't have a chance. That is a bad thing. Their vote matters on this floor. Madam Speaker, every single one of us is issued a voting card that should be controlled by the Member, not by somebody else. Today, the Republican Party is coming down once again on this floor and saying directly to the American people and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, We are not happy. The process is flawed. And we are going to hold accountable every Member that votes for this rule today, just like we are for the others. So if you bring what we consider to be a less than stellar bill to the floor and the process is part of that participation and you shut it out, you can expect to hear the same from the Republican Party. We want to be a part of this process, the American people do, and I even heard today your own Members again. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the bill that is with us today. The safety of this Nation, protecting America from terrorists, is of high and vital concern not only to this Member, but I think every single Member, as we have been reminded time after time that we cannot take our eye off the ball, that the security of this country is a job that must be done all day, every day, by a group of savvy professionals that I believe we presently have in this country. It is a combined effort of not only law enforcement and intelligence, but also it involves bright minds from this body also. Today what we are here to do is to consider reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act. This act was done 9 years ago, 9 years ago when our Nation was struck. It was crafted in such a way that there were provisions, ideas, thoughts that we did at the time where we said we need to make sure they are reauthorized, that these ideas are looked at, where we go through the processes and see what happens not only with our own effectiveness with the law, but also how our intelligence agencies are nimble enough to adapt themselves to make these changes. At the same time I say I am for this, it is unfortunate that my friends on the Rules Committee, my Democratic colleagues, continue to deny the minority due process by not allowing us to offer a motion to recommit. Time and time again Republicans are shut out of the amendment process, forcing us to simply accept what comes forward. I encourage my friends on the other side of the aisle to stop restricting this process in the House. Almost 9 years ago, as I stated, Congress passed this PATRIOT Act, bipartisan support, at a time that was very difficult not only for us to see that enemy that was at us, but also for us to understand more clearly how we should respond, and this Nation did respond. We responded with a PATRIOT Act that was specific in nature that allowed intelligence agencies to stand a chance to fight those against us. This legislation was and still is vital to our intelligence capacity and our desire to show the enemy that we're willing to fight, that we're willing to stand up and protect this country, that we're willing to go to the lengths that are expected of anybody who wants to protect their own homeland. Earlier this week, Ranking Member Lamar Smith of the Judiciary Committee, the gentleman from San Antonio, Texas, urged Democrat leaders, as we did not know whether this bill would come forward, to extend those expiring provisions, stating: ``Congress has a duty to protect the American people. Failing to reauthorize our national security laws in a time of heightened threat is reckless.'' These were the types of public comments that Republicans are making about the need to make sure that we press this body to get done its job with those processes. Yesterday, up in the Rules Committee, the gentleman, Mac Thornberry, also from Clarendon, Texas, testified in the Rules Committee about the importance of extending the expiring PATRIOT Act provisions at the time we were debating the Intelligence bill. I thought that Mr. Thornberry was well on point, was thoughtful, was articulate about the significance of providing the necessary debate on important issues and amendments. I think we just had a debate here on the floor where we went through how these issues need to be talked about in this body and every single Member needs to understand them as a result of their constitutional duty to protect and defend, not just our Constitution, but this country. And I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment when he said we need to provide the intelligence community with the appropriate tools to protect this Nation. Yesterday, the Senate passed this legislation by voice vote; confirming the importance of acting immediately. Look, I'm just for getting it done. I'm just for getting it done. If the Senate wants to do it by voice vote, that's fine. Today we are here on the floor to talk about the three provisions that were set to expire. They were set to expire because the previous Congresses have said we needed to have an active debate on these issues, like to talk about them, allowing the government to seek court orders for roving wiretaps on terrorism suspects who shift their modes of communication. Mr. Speaker, if there's one thing we learned, the enemy is smart and nimble and quick. They adapt themselves to the way we do business. We need to give our intelligence agencies the ability to be nimble, quick and to adapt themselves also. Glad this is being redone just in time. To allow investigators to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court order to procure certain records in national security investigations, you've heard this said for a long time. The people who are trying to protect this country are few in number, and the cases against them are very large. The number of people who are seeking to turn our country into another war zone where civilians are killed, where planes are blown up out of the sky, where we have inundation of our national security efforts, as well as cybersecurity, are numerous. We need to make sure our investigators have a clear understanding about the rules and are able to receive information in a legal process. Lastly, to allow the government to apply special court surveillance orders involving suspected terrorists that are called ``lone wolf'' terrorists who do not necessarily have ties to larger organizations. I think the gentleman, Mr. Rogers, made a point here from the Intelligence Committee that our ability to be able to see this for what it is, whether it's a part of a larger terrorist group or whether it's a lone wolf acting on his own, that we need to be able to make sure that we can fully vet these individuals before shutting them down and allowing them just to be treated as a person who's committed a crime. We need to be able to see that which is aimed at this country and to fully vet them. When people who are overseas terrorists come into this country by lying to us about why they would be coming and their intents, we need to be smart enough and nimble enough to pick these up. Each of these provisions are used by law enforcement officials and intelligence agents to prevent terrorist attacks. By reauthorizing these provisions today, which my party, the Republican Party, fully supports, we believe, for an additional year, will provide the appropriate defense and intelligence measures to protect Americans from another event like 9/11. If I offered some comments, Republicans would have been in favor of making these permanent in law. Of course, we need to make sure that we're re-evaluating these, but these should be made permanent law so that our law enforcement agencies set themselves in a position to be nimble enough to see the attack against us. I think 9 years' worth of effort has told us we need to give our law enforcement every single tool that we believe is reasonable. I think we've done it today. I wish we'd done it for more than a year, because here we are, we will be here a year from now, perhaps struggling with the same issue. Let's make these permanent additions to the Homeland Security PATRIOT Act. This country is under a constant threat of violence and terrorism, and that's why it's necessary to make sure that all of our intelligence and law enforcement have the appropriate tools to defeat those who would wish to do us harm. We don't need to look back very far to Christmas Day; but I would say to us that after that, we still had warnings that came from our intelligence community that said, and expect more, and expect more; which is the reason why we should be making these issues that we talked about today, not extending them for one more year, but to make them permanent to give our guys, our team, our men and women who are engaged in the professional aspect of protecting this country, the tools which they need to protect this country. Mr. Speaker, at this time I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. I would appreciate that. And in a colloquy, if the gentleman would allow me the time since he has indicated he has no further speakers, I will go ahead and consume my time with the knowledge that he would then be ending very quickly. And I thank the gentleman very, very much. Mr. Speaker, I am going to go ahead and proceed using up all my time at this time with the knowledge that he will be through. Mr. Speaker, at this time we have the gentleman from Gold River, California, a gentleman, Mr. Lungren, who has served as not only a Member of this body, then went back to California, served as the Attorney General from the State of California. He's a very thoughtful Member. He sees very clearly the laws of this country and the Constitution of this country, but he also sees the need for us to be nimble enough to see the attack that's against us, to be able to respond and to give our men and women who are on the front line all the assets and resources only that are necessary, but the laws and the underpinning of being able to make sure that we can fully protect this country. And I will yield to the gentleman 6 minutes at this time.