Marlin Stutzman

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to honor a native member of Indiana's Air National Guard today. Staff Sergeant Andre Carboneau was recently awarded Indiana Air National Guard Airman of the Year for 2010. The honorable award is designed to recognize members that are hardworking, are involved in the community, and have continued to advance themselves in education. After members compete on a quarterly basis, they compete at the State level to become the airman of the year. Carboneau received his award Friday, May 20, at Victory Field in Indianapolis. He is from Warsaw, Indiana, and a phase aircraft mechanic for 122nd Fighter Wing in Fort Wayne, Indiana. He is also a full-time student at Indiana State University, where he is majoring in professional aviation. I congratulate Staff Sergeant Andre Carboneau for his achievements and am proud of Indiana's 14,700 members of the Indiana Army and Air National Guard. Our Nation owes endless gratitude to these men and women in uniform who have devoted their lives to our security and the preservation of our liberty.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I stand honored to represent Indiana's Third Congressional District, which is home to one of the United States Armed Forces' finest members, Army National Guard Specialist Terrance McKinney. After a 2-day competition between 14,000 soldiers at Camp Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center, Indiana, from April 18-19, National Guard Specialist Terrance McKinney earned the title of Indiana's Army National Guard Soldier of the Year. McKinney, at age 25, is now joined with 54 others as the best National Guard soldiers in the country. McKinney was also recognized for his exceptional achievement Friday, May 20, 2011, at Victory Field in Indianapolis and moves on to compete at the regional level. McKinney is from Fort Wayne, Indiana, and a member of Detachment 18 Recruiting and Retention Command out of Muncie, Indiana. I congratulate Army National Guard Specialist Terrance McKinney for his achievements and am proud of Indiana's 14,700 members of the Indiana Army and Air National Guard. We owe endless gratitude to these men and women in uniform who have devoted their lives to our security, brought justice to the leader of al Qaeda, and continue to bring justice to those who seek to destroy us.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I find it very interesting in listening to the discussion here today about whose responsibility it is to feed those who are hungry. I don't think anybody on this floor would say that we don't want to help someone who is in need of food or basic essential services. I think what this is is a discussion about the difference in philosophy in Washington about the role of government in Washington. There is plenty of blame to go around for all of the spending that has come out of Washington over the last decade--the last 30 years, actually. What we are doing is we are sinking our Nation and our children, the children that we are talking about and whom we want to help and feed. We are actually giving them over $40,000 of debt. Each child that is born in this country is saddled with $40,000 of debt because of government spending that continues to grow more and more every year. I can tell you as an American farmer in Indiana that myself and many other American farmers and individuals are much better suited to help those who are in most need, in helping in the community, donating food, being a part of a food pantry. We are a generous Nation, and what has become of our ability to help is that we have a Federal Government that continues to saddle us with more and more debt, more and more taxes and regulation, making it much more difficult to make the profits with which we can then turn around and help our communities with food, with the basic services that our churches, our charities and many other organizations in our local communities provide. Instead of us always looking to the government for that assistance, let's back off of the American people and let them help themselves, when they are capable and when they are willing to do it, rather than continuing to put them further and further into debt. The Democrat Party talks about, Where are the jobs? Well, government doesn't provide jobs. Indeed, the private sector, people in our communities, entrepreneurs, people that want to expand their businesses to provide a job for that family that needs to provide for their children, they need the job, and there is not going to be enough government jobs to give them that opportunity. Instead, every time we take dollars away from the private sector, that individual who is out working hard, working 50 to 60 hours a week just trying to make ends meet, we are putting them in a very difficult position where they are not able to pay the bills because we continue to make it much more difficult for businesses to be successful here. Small businesses are the backbone of this country, and until Washington, DC, backs off, the American economy is going to continue to struggle and families are going to continue to struggle. I believe that this is a responsible bill that will instead help the American economy to grow and help Americans.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the chairman. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 802, as amended, as this bill would require the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish an award program to recognize businesses that excel in hiring veterans. We all know the unemployment problems facing many of our veterans. Our youngest groups of veterans have the highest unemployment rates among all the veterans, while older veterans between the ages of 35 and 64 make up two-thirds of the unemployed veteran population. As we look for ways to increase veteran employment rates, it is absolutely appropriate that we honor those businesses that make the effort to hire veterans and to emphasize and to recognize their efforts. This award not only highlights employers who currently hire veterans, but it is my hope that it will also serve as an incentive for other employers to hire more veterans as well. At the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity legislative hearing on the bill, some witnesses suggested that the program would be appropriately sponsored by the Veterans Employment and Training Service. While not required by the bill, I hope that the VA will consult with the Department of Labor during the selection process. I can tell you as a small business owner and one that highly values the service of our veterans to our country, I believe that this is a wonderful measure to recognize those businesses that not only go out of their way but make it a priority to hire veterans to work at their businesses. So, Mr. Speaker, highlighting businesses for their support of veterans seeking employment is the right thing to do, and I urge my colleagues to support Ranking Member Mr. Filner's bill, and I appreciate him bringing the bill forward.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of Chairman Runyan's H.R. 1407, as amended, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of- Living Adjustment Act of 2011. In addition to authorizing a cost of living increase for VA disability compensation for FY 2012, which I support, the bill contains provisions introduced by my Ranking Member Braley of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, as the Andrew Connolly Veterans' Housing Act. These provisions would extend the Temporary Residence Grant commonly called the TRA grant program for five years. The TRA program offers severely disabled veterans the opportunity to use a small portion of their Specially Adapted Housing grant to renovate the home of a family member to assist the veteran while the veteran is residing in the home on a temporary basis. This program is needed because many severely injured veterans need temporary housing while their long-term home is adapted to meet their disabilities. For some veterans that temporary residence is that of a parent or sibling. Anyone who attended the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity's hearing on Mr. Braley's bill could not be impressed by the courage shown by Mr. Connolly and his wife, Jennifer. Mr. Connolly is a former member of the Iowa National Guard unit that had the longest tour of duty in Iraq of any Guard unit. Unfortunately, he has been diagnosed with cancer of the spine and is confined to a wheelchair. His young son is also wheelchair-bound and is afflicted with a disease that requires the child to be on a respirator around- the-clock for life. That we would not extend a benefit that would make life better for Mr. and Mrs. Connolly is unthinkable and I applaud Mr. Braley for his work. I also thank Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Filner, and Chairman Runyan for including the provisions of the Andrew Connolly Veterans' Housing Act in this must-pass legislation. I urge all Members to support H.R. 1407 as amended.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of Chairman Miller's manager's amendment to H.R. 1383, the Restoring GI Bill Fairness Act of 2011. The bill would increase the cap on tuition and fees set by the Post- 9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, passed by Congress on December 16, 2010, as signed into law by President Obama as Public Law 111-377. The new law made several changes to the Post-9/11 GI Bill, including imposing a national cap of $17,500 per academic year on tuition and fees paid to private institutions. Unfortunately, the cap will reduce VA payments on behalf of up to 30,000 veterans already enrolled in these private schools by thousands of dollars in at least seven States. Those States would include New York, Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, South Carolina, and New Hampshire. Madam Speaker, H.R. 1383, as amended, would raise that cap to $27,000 for a period of 3 years for veterans already enrolled in these private schools as of April 1, 2011. Veterans who enroll after that date would be subject to the $17,500 cap on tuition and fees. In determining the amount of the new, temporary cap, we found that the College Board data showed that the average net tuition and fees charged to independent students attending the most expensive tier of private schools was roughly $22,540. Therefore, we believe that when combined with other Federal benefits like Pell Grants and the post-9/11 G.I. Bill's Yellow Ribbon program, the vast majority of veterans attending private institutions would not experience out-of-pocket costs. I would also point out that the Yellow Ribbon program offers schools the opportunity to make up any difference between the basic benefit and actual charges by sharing the difference dollar for dollar with the VA. Finally, I support the revised PAYGO offset. By meeting this change, we meet our statutory budget rules and allow veterans monthly stipends to reflect the most current amount of basic allowance for housing paid to servicemembers at the E-5 with dependents rate. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1383, as amended.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the chairman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support for H.R. 1657 that would revise the enforcement penalties for misrepresentation of a business concern as a small business concern owned and controlled by a veteran or a small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans. Section 502 of Public Law 105-50 set a goal for all Federal agencies to spend at least three percent of their procurement funds with small businesses owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans. On October 21, 2004, President Bush reinforced the Federal Government's 3 percent goals by signing Executive Order 13360. According to the Small Business Administration, at the time of that executive order, the overall Federal procurement from service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses was about .38 percent, or about one-tenth of the goal set by statute and executive order. Even the VA was short of the goal, spending about 1.3 percent service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. To help VA meet the goal, section 5 of Public Law 109-461 gave some new tools to the VA contracting staff that essentially gave service- disabled veteran-owned small businesses preference in small business set-aside contracts while not ignoring the VA's other statutory set- aside goals such as for firms qualified as HUBZone and minority-owned small businesses. As a result, SBA data for fiscal year 2009 shows that overall Federal spending with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses was about 1.98 percent, and VA spent nearly 17 percent with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. Clearly, the law was having a positive result for veteran-owned small businesses. Unfortunately, as James Earl Jones said in ``Field of Dreams'': ``If you build it, they will come.'' The ``they'' in this case are unscrupulous businesses that falsely claim veteran and disabled-veteran-owned status and the veterans who front for them. The GAO did a review of 10 firms claiming to be service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses and found that none of them qualified as service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. Since then, staff has continued to meet with the GAO and VA's Inspector General, and it is fair to say that there is no shortage of businesses fraudulently claiming to be veteran and/or service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. The original legislation merely authorized the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to debar these frauds for a period determined by the Secretary. However, given the continuing exposure of firms trying to steal contracts from legitimate veteran small businesses, I feel it necessary to provide some teeth to the law. My bill will direct the Secretary to debar these fraudulent firms and their principals for 5 years, and it would also set a schedule to speed up that action. Madam Speaker, I note that the VA did not support the bill, citing a one-size-fits-all approach could harm firms who make an honest mistake in claiming status as a veteran or service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. I again invite the VA to work with us to perfect a bill that will discourage frauds while protecting these contracts for valid veteran and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. I believe that at a time when the economy is very difficult and veterans are looking to either start their business or go back to work, this bill will ultimately meet the need and protect those veterans and the businesses that are available to them. I thank my distinguished ranking member, Mr. Braley, for his bipartisan support, as well as Chairman Miller and Ranking Member Filner for bringing H.R. 1657 to the House. I urge Members to support the bill.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thanks to my colleague from Arkansas. I appreciate his comments and what he is saying, and I agree with him wholeheartedly. I can tell you as a small business owner from Indiana, coming from a family farm background and having a small trucking operation, all of the talk here on this floor and in Washington doesn't make a lot of sense to a lot of Hoosiers. Growing up in the agricultural industry, it's hard work. And I know that my granddad and my father and other family members, my brothers, they're all willing to work hard. But I can tell you what: When the government makes it difficult, it's tough to go out there and say, I'm going to keep doing it. When the government comes in and says, We're going to make it harder for you to do your business, you start thinking twice, Do I really want to do what I love to do. Who creates jobs? Is it the government? I know some in this town believe that the government creates jobs. Well, how do they create that job? They take your dollar, my dollar, they collect it in taxes, and then they put it in a pot, and then we have this large entity we call Congress and bureaucracies, and our Federal Government decides we're going to pick and choose what type of jobs we're going to create. We're going to take those dollars that we've collected from the hardworking taxpayer and create a job. Well, that's not creating wealth. The folks in my district who build cars, they build steel, RVs, and medical devices that help enhance the quality of life. Agriculture. Boats. We're one of the largest manufacturing districts in the country. That's where wealth is created. That is where jobs are created. The government doesn't build any of that stuff. And they shouldn't. They can't do it as well as what the private sector can. But what the government does is spend money. That's why our jobs are looking somewhere else--because of the threat of higher taxes, the threat of regulation. We've got the EPA that comes in. Most of the folks that come into our office since I've been elected to Congress--this last year, I would say 90 percent of them come in and start talking about the regulation that the EPA and the enforcement attitude that the EPA has on our small businesses. How can any small business grow to be a big business if they're going to continually be hampered by our own government? FDA, OSHA mandates. We're going to be talking about Medicare. What is that going to look like in the future? And taxes. We hear our colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about the way government can grow business. The best way is to get out of the way. Right now, America has the highest corporate income tax in the industrialized world. Look at the other countries, whether Japan, Greece. All these other countries are finally figuring out because of just natural economic laws that you can't spend more money than you take in. Why would we want to raise taxes even more when people are starting to say, I'm out of here. I'm tired of doing business here. I don't think my dollar is safe in this country. And they're going to start taking their money overseas. That's why our jobs are leaving. I believe it's important that we have a flattened tax policy--one that is fair to everybody across the country, one that is not going to pick and choose winners. I appreciate what you're saying because jobs are not created by the government, they're created by Americans just like Henry Ford. The government didn't subsidize Henry Ford in creating the combustion engine. They didn't go out and subsidize Henry Ford in creating the Ford Motor Company. How many other small businesses started? So many American businesses started in a garage or somebody's shop and grew into some of the greatest companies in the world. But our government now wants to go in and make it more difficult for them and for small businesses.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a true American hero, Lance Corporal Brandon Joseph Long of the 3rd battalion, 5th Marines, ``Darkhorse'' Lima Company from my district in Ft. Wayne, Indiana. On September 27, 2010, while out on point in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, Brandon stepped on a pressure plate which nearly cost him his life. He died four times on that day. He said the thought of Nicole and his child Clair kept him alive and that he left his body, but when he rose up to Heaven they told him that it was not his time. He has been part of one of the most courageous units, losing over 150 United States Marines. In a few short months he has come so far and a large part is due to his family. His lovely supportive wife and new born child have put a smile on his face and given him something to live for. Some people are put upon this earth to teach us and inspire us. Well, Brandon is one of those people. In honor of Brandon, I ask that this poem, penned by Albert Caswell, be placed in the Record.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with concern over oil prices and the effect these high prices have on the American consumer. In my district in northeast Indiana, fuel prices are around $4.10 a gallon. Just this morning, WANE TV reported gas prices in northeast Indiana will be at $4.29 by the end of today. At $4.29 a gallon, many of my constituents will not get out of the gas station for under $80. The Third Congressional District of Indiana is rural and geographically expansive, causing many constituents to fill up their gas tanks two to three times a week simply from commuting to and from work. For many, this cost makes their total monthly expenditure for gas at or above their rent or mortgage payment. When President Obama took office, we saw gas prices at a national average of $1.84. Now we are told gas prices could be as high as $5 by Memorial Day. We cannot continue the status quo and expect Hoosiers to pay at the pump. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 1229, the Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act, and H.R. 1231, Reversing the President's Offshore Moratorium Act, sponsored by Mr. Hastings of Washington. These bills, along with H.R. 1230, the Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act, that the House passed last week, will help us move away from our dependence on foreign oil by opening restrictions placed on the Outer Continental Shelf, allowing us to tap into our domestic resources. Doing this will provide jobs to more Americans and lower our gas prices.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate the State of Indiana, Governor of Indiana Mitch Daniels, and Indiana State Legislature's accomplishments this past session that just ended. I believe it is important to reflect momentarily on the achievements made in Indiana to give promise and hope that the same can be done here in Washington. Something I'm particularly proud of is the fact that Governor Daniels and the legislature have passed the fourth straight gimmick-free balanced budget for the State of Indiana which will give Indiana a budget in the black 8 years running. We can do the same here in Congress. This legislative session in Indiana has also produced real education reform that was passed to usher in real choice for students and parents. Governor Daniels led the charge for full funding for kindergarten, the Nation's most expansive voucher program, more charter schools, and rewarding our teachers based on their effectiveness. We can do the same here in Congress. As we discuss tax reform and how to do it here in Washington, Indiana's already done it. They have done it by lowering corporate tax rates, lowering property taxes to give a great place for businesses to do work. We can do the same here in Congress. As a former State legislator in Indiana under the Daniels administration, I rise today because, in the midst of despair and partisan bickering, I know we can do the same here in Congress. We must do better.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank my colleague, Congressman Burton, for his comments. What a momentous day, as he said, that we can all take courage and to look to the future, but as well as celebrate the ending of a chapter that has caused so much pain and so much fear in the lives of many Americans. Three weeks after my wife and I had our first born child, our American homeland was attacked by terrorists on September 11, 2001. As I held my baby boy, I knew that I had to do something, and ensuring the future security of my two sons is the reason I ran for the U.S. Congress. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 tested our security, our defense, and our fortitude in protecting our country, but we have not stood idly by. For nearly 10 years now, our American soldiers have given their lives every day in Operation New Dawn, Operation Enduring Freedom, and now Operation Odyssey Dawn to protect our Nation and to secure justice. Their service demands respect and admiration. Last night, justice was served. bin Laden has been the leader and the symbol of al Qaeda for more than 20 years, continually plotting attacks against the United States and its allies. The word ``Qaeda'' means foundation or base. Osama bin Laden was the head of this foundation, the face of terrorism around the world, a foundation upon which its members expected to erect a vigorous, widespread network spreading terror around the world. Well, folks, we have beheaded their foundation. We have beheaded al Qaeda. And should they continue, we will be glad to bring justice and help them join their leader once again if they so choose. We must continue to fight. Our third President, Thomas Jefferson, said this: ``Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.'' We must use our strength and cultivate our relationships with the people around the world to ensure we take a stand against cruel dictatorships, tyranny and radical Islam. As I work with Congress and military commanders, I will fight to honor those who have died to secure our freedom because they deserve our utmost respect, and we should only be so grateful. I congratulate the men and the women of our military and intelligence communities who have devoted their lives to this mission. For this, our soldiers have America's boundless gratitude. I also want to commend and congratulate President Obama and President Bush for their determination and their willingness to continue the fight, to pursue Osama bin Laden, who has been the eluding terrorist, the face of terrorism around this world. And today, freedom has been victorious. I am honored to represent the people of Indiana's Third District and am proud of Indiana's 14,700 members of the Indiana Army and Air National Guard. It is the dedication of these men and women and their families who have brought the leader of al Qaeda to justice and will continue to bring justice to those who seek to destroy freedom and destroy America. As Winston Churchill once said: We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm. So, Mr. Speaker, today is one of those days that I didn't know that I would ever see, but stand here knowing that we have been victorious, but also know that the fight in front of us is not over with; that we will continue to be vigilant; that we will support our troops, our men and our women, our Commander-in-Chief in this fight on terrorism.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Chairman, we are 1 day away from Tax Day, and I believe that this is an appropriate time to be talking about the budget for our country. Many folks back in Indiana and across this country are talking about how they are going to meet the demands of their budget. I believe that this is a jobs bill. There is a lot of talk on this House floor about what are we doing about American jobs. I believe that this is the jobs bill of this Congress. We hear a lot from the other side of the aisle that we are going to revise and reform Medicare as we know it. Well, folks, we are facing $14.2 trillion of debt right now. We are facing a $1.6 trillion deficit in the current budget. Just as many families in Indiana and across this country do with their family budget, when the bottom line hits red, they start to make changes. We have to start controlling spending. I would encourage every American to read this budget. This budget bravely saves $6.2 trillion over the next decade. It also calls to simplify the Tax Code and lower the rates for individuals and businesses. This budget not only stops the growth in government, it actually grows the economy and starts to create jobs. Furthermore, we eliminate hundreds of duplicative programs, ban earmarks, and curb corporate welfare. In addition to the trillions in savings, this budget will put our Nation on a sustainable path, keep the sacred trust of our seniors, and presents to the American people real leadership in the absence of any from our executive branch. If you look at the President's budget, his budget proposes $9.1 trillion of new debt over the next decade. Let's talk about job creation. As a small business owner from Indiana, I don't need government to take more money away from the people that live in Indiana who are working hard. Let them keep that money so they can apply it to their businesses in order to grow jobs and grow the economy. There's no reason for more of our dollars to come to Washington, D.C., and be redistributed through our government. Mr. Chairman, I ask the people of this Congress to support this budget.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Garrett. At this time I would like to yield to the gentleman from the Fourth District of Colorado (Mr. Gardner).

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you. Next, I would like to yield to the co-chair of the Constitution Caucus, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Bishop, for your comments. Mr. Speaker, as I think about some of the comments that were made tonight from Mr. Garrett and from Mr. Gardner, as well as from Mr. Bishop, it brings back a lot of thoughts from experiences of serving not only as a legislator but also as a farmer and as a businessowner of a small trucking operation that we have, a family business, back in Indiana. I think about how the freedom that we have comes from not the Constitution; it comes from God. The rights that we have are God-given, and the Constitution protects those rights. I know that many times over the years we look at the Constitution as a dry document. It doesn't seem to be exciting. It doesn't seem to be one of great interest. But I can tell you today, Mr. Speaker, as we watch our Federal Government--as we've started to do the debate of budgets, of health care, and of our military actions around the world, and of the size and the scope of our Federal Government--it is crucial for us, for all of us, to remind ourselves and to reeducate ourselves on what our constitutional role is. As Mr. Bishop said, many times we talk about the horizontal separations of our government with the executive, the legislative and the judicial; but also we need to remember the vertical branches of government, and we need to remind ourselves that the States actually established the Federal Government. I can only imagine as our Founding Fathers were debating this and looking at the States that were in existence and thinking of the challenges they faced, the challenges of military action against them and how do they defend themselves, the discussion of taxation, and to come together and to establish a Federal Government that was designed to not only protect but to protect the rights, protect us physically, but to also protect the rights of us as individuals. Now looking back, Federalism is that balance of a Federal Government that complies with the constitutional guidelines, whether it's our national defense, whether it's our borders, or whether it's commerce and currency, the responsibilities are limited. But as time has gone by, the Federal Government has continued to grow and to pursue and to take away those responsibilities from States and from our local communities. As Mr. Gardner mentioned, the different local community visits that he has made, it reminds me of ones that I made as well in Indiana, whether it's talking with the mayor in Kendallville about the challenges with fire and police, whether it's the Topeka Town Council and the challenges they have with economic development, or whether it's Nappanee with their sewer challenges, Fort Wayne or Angola with streets and sewers and things that they know what they want to do and what they would like to accomplish that are all affected by Federal Government one way or another. And it drives costs up for not only them but ultimately for the citizens. As spending continues to accumulate and increase, we have to remember that the American taxpayer, the American citizen, we as citizens are the ones who ultimately are going to be responsible paying that bill. And as we come into our budget process over the next couple of days, I think that we should be reminded and would be remiss if we did not take the opportunity to look through the scope and look through the eyes of what our Founding Fathers imagined and intended for our country through the Constitution as we face $14 trillion of debt. States, local governments, and families don't have the ability to continue to borrow dollars; specifically, States and local governments don't have the same ability that the Federal Government has. And so they are disciplined. And so they realize that the decisions they make affect local communities. The Federal Government and we in Congress need to take on that same discipline and realize that the spending that we authorize today is going to affect our children and our grandchildren. I have two children, two sons, a 9-year-old and a 5-year-old; and I know that they are going to have to assume the responsibilities and the consequences of what happens today in Congress. And I refuse to stand by and allow for more spending and for the Federal Government to continue to grow. I want to see a country that respects the individual's life and liberty and our local communities' decision-making at the local levels and at the State level rather than a government, a Federal Government that continues to believe that they can authorize and tell the American people what to do and what they cannot do. So with those thoughts in mind going into the budget process, I believe we have a responsibility, Mr. Speaker, to challenge the status quo. We hear a lot of comments on this floor about what the changes are that are being proposed in the budget that just passed out of the Budget Committee last week and is going to be debated here on the floor tomorrow. I believe we cannot demonize the situation that we are in and use scare tactics with the American people. We need to be factual. We need to be honest. We need to realize the realities that we are in as Americans, because we are all in this together. This is not a Republican problem; this is not a Democrat problem. We see finger- pointing on this floor all the time. And frankly, I know as a freshman Congressman, that is not why I came here. I came here to fix the problems we have because of a bloated government and because we have overstepped the boundaries of our constitutional role. If we do not face the fact that we have trillions of dollars of debt, that we are overspending--and we have to also realize that we cannot raise taxes on the American people at a time when the economy is struggling, when American families are struggling and paying bills. By raising taxes, we only drive the cost of doing business higher and we drive the cost of living higher. Money cannot be circulated through the economy dictated by the Federal Government to stimulate or drive our economy. The American people do that much better. I believe as we again debate the budget, we need to realize that if we want to pass on a better future for our kids and our grandkids, for our country, for ourselves, if that's the way people need to look at it, I believe we lay out the situation, whether it is with Medicare and realizing that we cannot continue down the road with the program as it currently stands. If we want to hand that off to our children and our grandchildren, some modifications have to happen. I believe if we as Republicans and we as Congress, specifically Republicans in the majority here in Congress, lay out the plan and we make the case that something needs to be done, the American people are with us. They realize the debt that is hanging over us, and they realize the deficits that are over us cannot be sustained and we are going to have to make changes. But we cannot make progress in a bipartisan fashion if we continue to use scare tactics, and I believe that going back and looking at the constitutional role of our Federal Government, that all of us as Americans realize, as the many generations before us did in the challenges that they faced, that we are up to the challenge. So, Mr. Speaker, as we move into tomorrow, I believe that our constitutional responsibilities will be defined by what we do and what we say and what we vote on in the upcoming years. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the topic of enduring consequence. Last month, the members of the Constitution Caucus came to the floor to commend limited government as the guardian of human dignity. Tonight, we would like to continue that conversation by discussing one of the indispensable pillars of limited government. America's guarantee of limited government and her bulwark of liberty can be attributed to Federalism. Federalism is the subject which we often forget here in Washington, D.C. I believe this is a tragic irony because our great Nation is the birthplace of this truly revolutionary political concept. Federalism is not an abstract philosophy. Simply, it is the separation of power between the Federal Government and State governments. It is one of the cornerstones of our American experiment in self-government. It was unheard of before the American founding and unfortunately is all but forgotten today. Until our Founding Fathers devised our unique system of government, nations around the globe were dedicated to the faulty idea that power or sovereignty was indivisible. The great wisdom of the American founding was to reject this notion and build a robust government with a system that carefully divided power on two different levels. Yes, we are most familiar with the separation of three branches of government--legislative, executive, and judicial; but too many in Washington have forgotten that there is another division in government--the division between States and Federal Government. Mr. Speaker, we have one of the greatest documents to govern our country that has existed for over 200 years and has been one of the documents that has guided so many Americans and people across this country into personal responsibility, to the ability to take opportunities that we have been granted in this country. The 10th Amendment sums up this structural integrity of the Constitution and the dual sovereignty of the Federal and State governments. The 10th Amendment says this: ``The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'' As a former State legislator, I've seen this and been very frustrated at times as a State legislator in the powers that the Federal Government continues to assume and is basically overreaching the responsibilities and the powers of the State government. Federalism, as you know, was a huge debate and discussion as part of the founding of our great Nation back when our Founding Fathers were discussing what should be in the Constitution. During the debate over States' rights and Federalism, there needs to be a balance between what the States are responsible for and what the Federal Government is responsible for. And our Constitution lays those responsibilities out and defines those responsibilities very clearly. I believe it's very important for us, as Congress and Congressmen and Congresswomen, to refamiliarize ourselves with our Constitution and realize that the boundaries that have been laid out by our Founding Fathers are well defined. And the intent and the vision that was laid out is one that is still applicable today. I believe that the Federal Government continues to overreach as to those boundaries--whether it's massive spending, whether it's an overreach in our health care bill that just passed last year, whether it's the stimulus package which the Federal Government is now assuming the responsibility to stimulate our economy rather than trusting in the American people. It does not add anything to the Constitution that was not already there in its structure, but in making the principle of Federalism more explicit, the 10th Amendment underscores the importance of Federalism. To see Federalism succeed, we must hold faith in the integrity of the Constitution. A living document is just an empty vessel. Federalism is neglected when politicians make the Constitution a blank slate for the dominant political trends. As James Madison wrote in Federalist Number 45: ``The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.'' So, Mr. Speaker, I would like to read again the 10th Amendment of our Constitution: ``The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'' So, Mr. Speaker, I'd submit to you that many of the programs that the Federal Government currently not only operates but also is proposing under several different bills over the past several years really are overreaching into the State governments' responsibilities and also into what they are fully capable of doing. Many times the frustration that we had of dealing with Medicaid and the mandates that were handed down to the States were tying the hands of our State governments. Coming from the State of Indiana, I'm very proud of what has been accomplished because of those who respect not only the simple economics of balancing budgets and realizing that you can't spend more money than what you have, but as a member of the Indiana House of Representatives of 2005, I worked with our Governor and our Senate to see that Indiana passed its first balanced budget in 8 years. As we've discussed repeatedly here in Congress already, what about balanced budgets, what about the responsibility of making sure that we do not spend more money than what we have? Our Federal Government just closed its budget with a $1.5 trillion deficit, and that's hard to imagine that we could actually spend that much more money than what we take in. Any Hoosier family knows that once that line at the bottom of the checkbook hits red, there's a problem, and we need to reevaluate what we are currently doing in our spending and our income. Either you start cutting spending or you start increasing your income. As we all know with the difficult economic times that we're in, increasing income is not always as easy as we would like it to be. So what we need to do is control what we can control, and that is the spending. Today, Indiana is squarely in the black because of very difficult decisions. It has a AAA credit rating, and is home to the fewest State employees per capita in the United States. The initiative was taken when times were difficult and in realizing that we were falling on tough economic times. As we move forward in this Congress, I believe that we need to take the same principles and the same values that States have and local governments have and families have across the country, and businesses, who all realized that you cannot continue to spend more money than what you are taking in. Progressivism has been the greatest foe of federalism. Progressivism believes in a government of, by, and for the experts, statisticians, and bureaucrats. Federalism believes in government of, by, and for the people and their unique communities. So, again, here I would argue that communities and people are much more capable, because they know their particular circumstances and how they are to manage not only their own dollars but their own lives, whether it's education or whether it's being involved in their church, in giving to their church or charity groups. But instead, we're seeing a government that continues to intrude in taking more and more of those responsibilities, but also the rights that we all have as citizens, in taking those away from Americans and giving them to the Federal Government. We all know the Federal Government is never capable of fully meeting the needs that every individual has in our country. Progressivism ends up elevating unelected experts to rule over the entire Nation. Rules promulgated by an alphabet soup of agencies choke out representative government, and Congress calls hearings to slow them down. We are seeing that repeatedly right now, Mr. Speaker, with hearings that we are having currently in our committees and in asking questions of the bureaucracies on the rule-making decisions that they are making every day. It continues to choke out not only our freedoms and opportunities that we enjoy as Americans, whether it's in business or whether it's as individuals, but also the bureaucracies are becoming much more powerful. Now that the Congress is not passing overreaching legislation, we're seeing the bureaucracies taking on that role. And I believe that it is crucial for us as Americans to step forward and to remind ourselves what our Federal Government's responsibilities are. The Constitution clearly defines those responsibilities. And I believe it's important that we all become more familiar again with our Constitution and with the responsibilities that the Federal Government is responsible for. Likewise, federalism today should not be confused with nullification, nor with the idea of secession. Federalism must be revived so that the rights of citizens might be upheld and their duties fulfilled. Federalism is the protector of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I can only imagine at the time, as our Founding Fathers were debating federalism and creating a Federal Government with the State governments that they had at the time, that they never imagined that the Federal Government would become as large and bureaucratic and bloated and irresponsible as it is today. When the Federal Government exercises control over health care, welfare, housing, unemployment, and even the so-called stimulus of our economy, there is less incentive for citizens to act within their communities and States to fulfill the duties they once assumed. Civic virtue suffers as power flows to Washington, D.C. Ordinary Americans are neglected in this top-down solution. Many argue that Washington knows better, that bureaucrats know better, that the experts know better. But I know, growing up as a son of a farmer in northern Indiana, that my parents, my grandparents, they all knew what was important for our family. They knew what was important to our community. Whether it was being involved in our school, whether it was being involved in our church community, whether it was being involved in our local economy or our government process. Families and individuals can make those decisions, what's important, and make those priorities, pass those priorities on to their families. I believe that what's happening today in our country is that we're seeing less and less not only interest, but also responsibility is now being assumed by our Federal Government, because it continues to overreach and to continue to take away the responsibilities of local governments, whether it's a school board which would make much better decisions for their local community and their school, whether it's a county council that knows the challenges that they have with their counties. I know for us we have a lot of lakes and rivers, a lot of sandy soil, sewer systems that need to be built to keep our environment clean and better for our children and grandchildren as we pass on the resources that we have. We are starting to have our hands tied more and more because of regulations coming from Washington, D.C. I believe that that is what our Founding Fathers intended. They believed in ordinary citizens making extraordinary decisions for their communities and that the structure of our Constitution protected that. In short closing here, as I want to turn it over to my colleagues, I would warn those who are in Congress that we think ourselves too wise if we believe that federalism espoused in our founding documents is an antiquated relic of the past. Governments are the products of fallen men. Human nature is the same today as it was in 1787. When the Federal Government grows beyond its original purpose, when it greedily claims powers belonging to the States and local communities, it arrogantly assumes that 535 Federal legislators and hordes of bureaucrats can direct with perfect clarity the lives of over 300 million Americans. I would be amiss to claim that I know the daily concerns of Buckeyes, or those who are in New Jersey, or from Texas, or from Oklahoma, or from California. But I know Hoosiers because I am one. I know and believe these simple truths. The rich diversity of our Nation's 50 States impels us to greatness. There are legitimate concerns which must be addressed by a well-balanced Federal Government. Yet the Federal Government ought to defer to the States in those matters that the States are best prepared for. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you. It is probably all too common, unfortunately, because this document, I believe, as I said earlier, is one that doesn't appear to be exciting. But when you read it and when you realize what it does for our freedom and that it protects our rights as individuals of this great Nation, it is so important for us to understand, and if we don't know, to find out, to listen to others who have gone before us, whether it is our Founding Fathers or whether it is those who have served in different capacities, whether it is in schools or whether it is in government, there is a reason for it. It is the 9th and 10th Amendments, and it is the 9th and 10th points of our Bill of Rights. I think that is what of our Founding Fathers meant. They meant it to be at the end to give those responsibilities back to the State governments because they knew that the Federal Government wasn't going to be responsible. They couldn't absolutely take care of everybody with the role and the size that the Federal Government was at that time. We are in a situation today where I believe many Americans believe and they know in their heart what is right, and that our Constitution protects those rights and that we believe in freedom. We believe in that entrepreneurial spirit and that we can go out and make something of ourselves. As I said, I am the son of a farmer and have the opportunity to serve in Congress, which is a humbling experience, but at the same time knowing that we have a responsibility for our kids and for our grandkids, for our country, for the freedom that we have, for the opportunity we have. I believe that this is a perfect time for us to know what the Constitution says, to understand it and to apply it. Whether you are on the school board, which is one of the most important positions I believe any individual can run for, to be involved in our children's education, whether it is on the city council, town council, county council, State government, those are all such important, township government, are all so important because an engaged person involved in the community, involved in the government, can make a difference. That is what I believe to be so fascinating is that this document empowers us as Americans. It doesn't take power away. It doesn't give power strictly to the Federal Government. It is one that believes in the American people. As I mentioned before, with the budget debates coming forward, if we continue to go down the path of higher spending, higher taxes, of more regulation, that we only take away opportunity. We take away the empowerment that was given to the American people, and that we all should be grateful that we can go back to the Constitution and have this discussion and have this dialogue about the responsibilities of the Federal Government and making that case to those of us in Congress and to our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the responsibilities and the opportunities that State governments, local governments, not only can they do, but they can do it better because they can meet the needs of their local communities because they hear from local citizens. I believe that government that is closest to the people serves the people better. With that, I appreciate each of my colleagues this evening being part of the Constitutional Caucus discussion here on the House floor. I am looking forward to many more. I know that each of us have great responsibilities in front of us in realizing what the Federal Government's role is, according to this document, and that we take these very seriously in the upcoming days and that we don't continue to grow the size and the scope of government. I thank the Speaker for the time.

Mr. STUTZMAN

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I just would like to make a couple of comments in closing. I have appreciated the comments that were made by the other gentlemen that were here this evening. You know, one of the things I believe is that the American people that have been given the rights and the responsibilities to elect those of us who are fortunate enough and honored to come to Washington to serve are paying attention and that they are paying attention to what we are doing in response to the actions that have been taken over the years here in Washington. Washington seems to be the problem. When I go back home to Indiana, I hear repeatedly from folks that, you know, Republican, Democrat, we can point the finger from side to side, but it has been Washington that has been out of touch with the American people, and that Washington needs to be changed, not necessarily America needing to be changed. And that is why I believe it is so important for us as Americans that we get back to our founding documents, to realize the truths and the principles that are in these documents that our Founding Fathers wrote over 200-some years ago. And I would like to read just a couple of lines from the Declaration of Independence, as Mr. Garrett was referring to earlier, the freedom and the opportunity that each of us as Americans has is given to us by our Creator, but also the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution give us rights and freedoms as well. I'd like to refer to these lines in the Declaration of Independence. Many of these are obviously very familiar to us, but: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Now, I would submit, Mr. Speaker, that the people are the ones who are giving us the power to govern and that the Constitution, as it was written back by our Founding Fathers, was written in the effort to protect each individual and to protect each individual freedom that we have and enjoy every day. I would also mention, as was mentioned before, that it is important for us as Americans to not only take on that personal responsibility but also to realize that our freedoms are given from our Creator, and it's important for each one of us to not only fight to protect those freedoms but remember some of the words that our Founding Fathers used as well, going back to what Benjamin Franklin said, and I quote, Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters, end quote. So it is up to each one of us as Americans, Mr. Speaker, that we are, first of all, as individuals and as communities involved in our communities, whether it's our churches, whether it's our schools, that we are taking on each responsibility and looking around us and who can we help, how can we make a difference in someone else's life. I'd also read John Adams. He said this, quote, Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other, end quote. How fortunate we as Americans are to have not only this founding document but many other founding documents written by men who were given such a great responsibility and a great opportunity to create one of the longest-lasting governments in world history; and I'm so proud to be an American tonight and believe that, even though we have many challenges in front of us, we have great debt, we have great deficits, and this is because of the irresponsible actions taken by those in Washington. I believe that today it is important for each one of us as Americans to become more familiar with our Constitution and to read the words, as it may seem sometimes dry and not as exciting, but this document, these words give each one of us as Americans the opportunity to make life better than what we may have entered. I know for myself as a son of a farmer in northern Indiana, I was raised in an old farmhouse; and now I have the great opportunity to serve in Congress, that each one of us can do great things if we set our minds to it, and it's because of this document that gives us that liberty and that freedom. So I have great hope that the American people and that those who are elected to serve will make those choices that will not only continue to grant us those freedoms but also steer the ship and turn the ship and change the mindset of Washington and the way that our Federal Government has responded and acted over the years recently, that will not only give our children and our grandchildren the same opportunities that we have but to work together across the aisle, knowing that we all serve and have sworn to uphold the Constitution to make those changes. I'm optimistic, I'm hopeful; but I know that we have a lot of work ahead. And I believe that the document we have been given and was signed by our Founding Fathers has given us that guiding light, and I am looking forward to working together with the Members in this Chamber, both sides of the aisle, to making a difference and to getting back to our constitutional responsibilities.

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to represent the people of Indiana's Third District, and I am also proud to serve as a cochair of the Constitution Caucus here in Congress. The hottest fires make the strongest steel. After seeing Washington assail the Constitution, Americans went to the polls last November and demanded a return to our first principles. As a result, the membership of this caucus has more than doubled. We began this Congress by reading the Constitution right here on the floor. We have come here this evening in that same spirit. I rise today to continue a conversation that used to fill the halls of this great building. There was a time in our Nation's past when Members of Congress openly and passionately debated the interpretation of the Constitution. We are here tonight to renew that discussion. When we were sworn in, each of us took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. This means that we are required to interpret and apply it to our daily work. I am sure that we all take that oath very seriously. However, I am also sure that, without vigilance, we slip out of tune with the principles enshrined in that founding document. Today, we have an opportunity to rededicate ourselves to those principles, to limited government and individual equality. In the coming months, my colleagues and I will come again to the floor to discuss federalism, checks and balances, and enumerated powers. Today, however, we ought to begin by asking ourselves a very simple question: ``What is so wonderful about the Constitution?'' After all, I believe, the last election was a mandate to return to its wisdom and guidance. We ought to at least begin by asking why it should hold such prominence in our hearts. Why, for example, did Abraham Lincoln declare so forcefully, ``Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties''? The answer is elegantly simple. The Constitution enshrines the enduring principles of limited government, and limited government is the surest guardian of human dignity. The Constitution gave form and shape to the philosophy put forth in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration, it has been said, was the promise; the Constitution is the fulfillment. I cannot overemphasize the truly revolutionary nature of our War for Independence. For the first time in human history, when a group of people overthrew an oppressive regime, they began by espousing a vigorous and eloquent philosophy: That all men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Even as lives, fortunes, and sacred honor hung in the balance, these men began with a summary of human nature. America was founded on the idea that humans have a specific character. We are wired a certain way. Our Founding Fathers understood two basic and profound truths about human nature. First, we are not perfect. We err. We will never reach perfection. To believe that man is perfectible is to engage in fanciful speculation. Second, in spite of our fallen natures, we are dignified and equal. We each possess reason and the ability to determine our own lives. As James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, eloquently stated: ``What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.'' How then can imperfect beings govern in a way that respects human dignity? The answer is found in limited government. Again, James Madison said this: ``You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.'' Limited government justly defends the dignity of the individual through specific and checked powers. Do not confuse limited for weak. Government ought to be strong in those areas where strength is required and specifically enumerated. In all other areas, the government must defer to the judgments of free men and women. In our Republic, the dignity of the individual citizen is paramount. It would be arrogant to believe that a few elite can discern and direct over 300 million souls here in America. I fear, with ballooning government and near unstoppable deficits being run every year, we are dangerously close to abandoning the principles that brought us here safely thus far. As regulations infringe on nearly every aspect of daily life, human dignity is endangered. Those of us here this evening are ready to work against this tide, to return our government to its proper role of defending individual freedoms. I am eager to continue this conversation in the coming months, because there is much work to be done. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett), the original founder of this caucus.

Mr. STUTZMAN. It is my pleasure to now yield such time as he may consume to the fellow chair, the cochair of the Constitutional Caucus, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. STUTZMAN. Next I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina, District Three, Jeff Duncan.

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you. Very eloquently said. I would like to touch on a couple of things that the gentleman from South Carolina said, Mr. Speaker. As we did have a great opportunity to read the Constitution on the House floor, I found it not only to be one that should be a lesson for all of us, but also one that will remind each American of the great document that we have that governs our land. I would like to read just a couple of statements that some of our Founding Fathers made that I believe are so important for each one of us to remember today. First of all, I would like to start with George Washington, who is my political hero. What a great man who not only was so willing to sacrifice and was willing to serve his great country, and he could have been king if he was wanting to, but instead knew that limited power was going to be the real answer to America's new Constitution and to its new Government. George Washington said: ``The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes and for a certain limited period to representatives of their own choosing. And whenever it is executed contrary to their interest or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can and undoubtedly will be recalled.'' Mr. Washington was referring to elections. I think what has not only solidified our government for years and years has been that it is the people, the people's government. The people have the ability to recall those who are elected to go to their representative capitals, whether it is in the State governments or here in Washington, D.C., and if their wishes are not received by the people, the people can recall them back to their State and elect someone new. Also, I would like to read another statement by Thomas Jefferson: ``On every question of construction let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.'' Thomas Jefferson was our third President and was one of the great men who took part in building our great democracy and our Republic here in the great country of the United States. I would also like to refer a little bit to my time in having the opportunity to serve in the Indiana State legislature and knowing that Thomas Jefferson was a Federalist who believed in States' rights. And one of the things I have seen in my short time in Washington is that the States have so much flexibility, have so much more ability to serve the people, as well as our local governments. And that is one of the reasons that I believe the Constitution was formed to protect that local control. As we've seen time and time again, there is more influence by our Federal Government in reaching further and further into our communities with more mandates, with more legislation that continues to take away our freedoms. And having the opportunity to serve in the State legislature in Indiana, I would also share that we can see how each State has different needs, and the Constitution addresses that by limiting the powers of the Federal Government. And we're seeing more and more waste of tax dollars, something that I believe that the American people are tired of, and they want to see Washington fix its problems just like the American people do every day in tightening their own belt. We tighten our belt in our small family farming operation back in Indiana. We do that with our family budget. And people are asking across the country, If we can do it, why can't Washington? And we're seeing overlap of Federal and State and local governments; and I believe if we would get back to the constitutional roles, the constitutional role that the Federal Government is given, and focus on the priorities that our Founding Fathers gave to us and the Constitution as a government, then we will be more effective, we will serve the people who have elected us to serve, and instead of infringing upon the responsibilities and the rights of those in our States that we will have a more efficient government and we will also have a government that is closer to the people and one that I believe serves best when government is close to the people and will serve and respond to the needs of them. At this time I would like to yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway). Thank you for being here and I look forward to your comments.

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you. I would like to yield again to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire how much time we have remaining.