Todd Tiahrt

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, earlier last week, the EPA announced that carbon dioxide is a health hazard and a pollutant that should be regulated under the Clean Air Act. That means that you and I are polluting simply by breathing. Make no mistake about it, the timing of this announcement was intentional. By issuing the ruling last week, the EPA is attempting to gloss over the inconvenient truth of thousands of emails by climate researchers revealing ways they manipulated or hid evidence that disproves their theories of climate change. Furthermore, the ruling is an attempt to avoid the fact that the American people are opposed to this job-killing cap-and-tax bill that has been stalled in the Senate. Inconveniently, that leaves negotiators in Copenhagen unable to broker a binding agreement. The EPA is destroying the democratic process and rushing in to legislate where Congress refuses to tread. Will the American people support the administration's latest effort to regulate even more private companies out of business? I wouldn't hold my breath.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, over the past several months, Airbus and their congressional allies have been pushing the Pentagon to change the requirements for the air refueling tanker so that the French company will win the contract. Just last month, the Airbus team sent the Department of Defense a clear ultimatum: If you don't change your requirements, we won't bid. The Air Force needs an air refueling tanker that meets the needs of the warfighter, not the needs of the French. Airbus is gambling that the threat of not having a competition will force the Air Force to change their requirements, the very same requirements that were determined by the Air Force to meet the needs of the warfighter. To change them to meet the needs of the competition does not serve the interests of our fighting men and women or the Nation. If Airbus chooses not to offer the tanker in a bid that the Air Force needs, then that's their choice, and then the decision will be an easy one for the Pentagon. After 7 years of trying to recapitalize the KC- 135 tanker fleet, we know what it takes to ensure that the warfighter gets the tanker they need and the taxpayer gets the protections we need, even in a sole-source award. Our military and American workers shouldn't have to wait any longer for the tanker they both deserve: an American tanker built by American workers at an American company.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chair, on June 30, 2009, the Obama Administration released details of its proposal to establish a Consumer Financial Protection Agency as an independent agency in the executive branch to regulate the provision of financial products and services to consumers. Five months later, Congressman Frank, Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has turned this proposal into a 1,300-page bill that further extends the federal government's hands into more aspects of our economy. I oppose this legislation for several reasons. One, it will permanently extend the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP)--something that I've been actively trying to end. I recently introduced legislation that will effectively end TARP by eliminating the Treasury Secretary's authority to utilize this program. This bill also creates another czar--a Credit Czar. This unelected official is granted the authority to restrict access to credit and impose taxes on consumers and small businesses. These reforms will continue to perpetuate the bailout mentality that has plagued our Nation and eliminate access to credit for many small businesses and families at a time when they need it most. One of the most troubling aspects of this bill is the vague, subjective standards that nonfinancial companies must meet. One such example of the bill's vagueness is found in the definition of businesses that engage in ``financial activities'' and those that pose a ``systematic risk'' to the stability of the financial market. A business that engages in ``financial activities,'' is now subject to increased regulations and fees. Exactly who comes under this definition, however, is not that clear. Maybe this will fall under the new ``Credit Czar's'' job description. Nonetheless, this bill will drastically affect businesses, specifically non-financial businesses that had no part in the irresponsible decisions that lead to the market collapse in 2008. Vague definitions expose non-financial businesses that utilize the commodity and derivatives markets to manage risk and plan for the future. These markets, which date from the 1980s, involve hedgers. Hedgers, producers or commercial users of commodities, trade in futures to offset price risk. They use the markets to lock in today's price for transactions that will occur in the future, shielding their businesses from unfavorable price changes. This bill restricts the use of these practical business tools. These practical tools encourage job creation and provide customized hedges to help businesses like farmers, grocery stores and energy companies to manage price volatility, so that retail prices can remain low and stable. Yet H.R. 4173 authorizes government regulators to arbitrarily impose capital and margin requirements for ``over the counter'' (OTC) derivatives, and impose new capital requirements for cleared swaps, which would lead to increased retail prices and make it less likely that corporations could engage in responsible risk management. Companies that utilize these markets to shield themselves from future risk and uncertainty in the energy markets should not be penalized for planning ahead. Unless the definition of ``financial activities'' and others like it are changed, companies who have not contributed to the market collapse will be required to shell out large sums of money as security for increased regulations. This will no doubt drive up operational costs and increase the price of energy. In the midst of continuing economic turmoil, this bill increases the size of government, expands its reach in the marketplace, jeopardizes the safety and soundness of many of America's financial companies and non-financial companies, and significantly increases the cost of credit for all consumers at a time when consumers can least afford it. For the above reasons, I am opposed to this bill. I encourage my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Iowa. I also want to thank Chairman Obey for working with me on Labor, Health and Human Services. But Mr. Speaker, this bill is a classic example of a dysfunctional appropriation process. My principal opposition to this bill is the excessive amount of spending. We are spending more and more money each year and we don't know where we are going to get it. The American people don't have it; in fact, this past fiscal year, fiscal year 2009, we overspent by $1.4 trillion. That's $5,000 per person, approximately that we didn't have. And for those of us that pay Federal taxes, that's about $14,000 per taxpayer overspent last year. This year, we have already overspent $259 billion and we're on course to overspend by $1.6 trillion. That will be an increase in the deficit of about $16,000 per taxpayer, money we don't have that we have to go out and borrow. So where is the money going to come from? We're going to borrow it from the Chinese. Well, maybe the Chinese don't want to loan it to us. Then we'll just have to print it. Well, if we print it, that drives inflation. If the Chinese don't loan it to us, we're in trouble. We will be headed for a round of inflation based on the current projections. The excuse that we get for borrowing and spending all this money is we've got to get the economy to recover. Borrowing money to fund big government doesn't grow our economy, it only grows big government. But we go out and hire all these people in big government. They've got to do something, so they write regulations. Regulations slow down our economy. If you want to speed up the economy, freeze the regulations; put them on a benefit-cost analysis. We forget that for every one of these government workers, it takes five private sector employees to pay for that one Federal Government job. So we have the idea of how we are going to create private sector jobs instead of growing the size of government. This bill spends so much money they have had trouble finding out where to spend more money. They decided that they were going to fund free needles to dope addicts and junkies--I'm just glad that we're not buying kegs for Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. They pay for abortions in the District of Columbia and they can't prove that it's not Federal tax dollars by their Federal funds provision because it all gets commingled. And then we're borrowing about $350 million we think, from the Chinese to give to the World Bank so that we can give it to some third-world countries to fight global warming. So we have a questionable source of funds sent to questionable countries to fight a program based on questionable science. Mr. Speaker, this bill is out of the question. I would ask all my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, throughout our history, Americans have worked vigorously to achieve great success despite extraordinary hardships. Farmers have tilled the earth, inventors have exercised their ingenuity, builders have constructed, entrepreneurs have established businesses, and all made our nation even greater than the founding fathers envisioned. In the process of becoming successful, wealth is created. When a person successfully pursues a dream and wisely manages resources over a lifetime, the Federal Government should not punish those accomplishments by seizing a significant portion of what was intended to be passed along to family members upon death. Due to burdensome death taxes, there are countless examples of families who have been forced to sell their business or purchase it back from the government. A business that has been in a family for generations can be lost overnight because of the death tax. And when a business leaves its family roots, there is a loss of pride in the fundamental traditions that helped make the business a success. This is not the legacy parents want to leave their children and grandchildren. Growing up on a family farm, I understand the impending doom the death tax imposes. Instead of proudly teaching one's children and grandchildren how to work the land of their forefathers, farming families are instead focused on whether they can save enough to pay the death tax or literally, ``lose the farm.'' I am pleased to have worked with my colleagues in the House of Representatives to eliminate this tax. I strongly supported the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, EGTRRA. Under EGTRRA, the death tax and generation-skipping transfer tax are scheduled to be repealed effective January 1, 2010. However, the death tax will come back in full force on January 1, 2011, unless Congress takes action to extend or permanently repeal the tax. Mr. Speaker, we don't need a reform to the Death Tax, we need full repeal. Under this legislation, the 0 percent tax death tax rate in 2010 will be raised by 45 percent. This is not the direction we should be moving in. In both the 107th and 108th Congresses, the House passed legislation making the repeal permanent, but the Senate did not. In the 109th Congress, the House passed H.R. 8 that would have permanently repealed the estate tax. On June 8, 2006, the Senate held a cloture vote on a motion to proceed to consider H.R. 8. However, the vote of 57-41 fell three votes short of the 60 needed to consider the bill. Instead of fully repealing the Death Tax, this Democrat majority deems it necessary to still tax almost half of an individual's estate upon their death. The legislation before us today will keep the estate tax at its 2009 level, meaning the government gets 45 percent of a deceased person's estate valued over $3.5 million dollars instead of 0 percent as under the 2001 act. Additionally, the $3.5 million exemption is not indexed for inflation. Similar to the Alternative Minimum Tax, the Death Tax will gradually affect more and more families and businesses than originally intended. I have been a strong supporter of permanently ending the death tax throughout my career and will vigorously oppose this tax increase in the President's budget and the underlying bill before the House today. This is not the legacy parents want to leave their children and grandchildren. This is not the legacy that this Congress wants to leave to its constituents. I unequivocally urge my colleagues to vote against this unjust tax scheme.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, we need an American air refueling tanker built by an American company with American workers. And we need it now more than ever. With unemployment at over 10.2, it's unbelievable that the Pentagon would consider outsourcing this key national security asset to the French. But not only is the Department of Defense considering this; they are bending over backwards to ensure that EADS, the French company, can compete. The Department of Defense is turning a blind eye to the World Trade Organization's ruling that found EADS guilty--guilty of receiving billions of dollars in illegal subsidies. This distorts the marketplace and gives EADS a clearly unfair advantage in the competition. The Department of Defense is also waiving five expensive regulations for the French company, but not for the American workers. This makes the American tanker more expensive and less competitive. The Pentagon should develop a fair level playing field for the air refueling tanker competition, and this can only happen when these illegal subsidies are considered and all regulations are equally applied to both competitors.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reluctant opposition to H.R. 3961. I say reluctant because we desperately need a real physician reimbursement rate fix. The future of medicine and the health of Americans, especially seniors, depends on a cost-based formula to reimburse providers for medical expenses. This bill, however, is not a real fix but yet another political and budget gimmick. The issue known as the ``doctor fix'' is familiar to us all, but I don't think that the majority fully understands who suffers under inadequate physician pay--the American people. CMS reimbursement rates to providers is anywhere from 30-70 percent of actual cost, based on the specific procedure. Even the highest CMS reimbursement is still loss to providers. It isn't just the doctors who suffer but also the patients. Many doctors have to close their door to new Medicare and Medicaid patients or face bankruptcy. This is especially troubling in rural areas where there are limited providers and seniors face a serious medical accessibility problem. In Kansas, between 20-30 percent of physicians say they will no longer accept new Medicare patients. These doctors, especially in rural areas, go into their profession to help people and having to turn away patients is a measure of absolute last resort. The current formula for physician reimbursement is known as the sustainable growth rate, SGR, and has little if anything to do with actual costs. That is why year after year Congress passes adjustments to prevent cuts in reimbursement rate. These adjustments are the bare minimum that we can do, even staving off cuts for one year does not allow for certainty in the system. For that reason, for years several of us have been trying to get CMS to get rid of the SGR and instead base reimbursement rates on actual medical costs. I brought data to then-Chairman Bill Thomas showing that more and more Kansas doctors were refusing new Medicare patients. Due to the overwhelming evidence that this is a real problem, the House version of the Medicare Modernization Act, the prescription drug bill, included language directing CMS to scrap the SGR and come up with a real reimbursement rate formula. Unfortunately, the Senate stripped that provision and subsequent efforts to enact real SGR reform have failed. H.R. 3961 is not real SGR reform, but rather putting lipstick on a pig. As the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons asserts, ``It just trades one complicated federal formula for another, and still leaves physician pay subject to Congressional whim in the future.'' The Democrat proposal uses GDP and other factors instead of actual cost to calculate reimbursement rates and does nothing to prevent the need for further congressional 1-year adjustments to the rate. The Democrat health care proposals, including H.R. 3961, do nothing to address the rising cost of health care, and indeed will cause costs to rise faster than they do today. There are several things we need to do to improve access to and quality of health care, including addressing physician reimbursement rates. Real health reform requires addressing the cost centers that are driving insurance costs up, reducing provider services, and discouraging professionals from entering medicine. For this reason, a recent IB/TIPP Poll revealed that two-thirds of physicians oppose the Democrat bills, and furthermore warn of dire consequences should they be enacted. In addition, 45 percent of physicians said that they would consider leaving their practice or take early retirement. I am hopeful that the Democrat leadership will abandon this political gimmick and work with us to address physician reimbursement rates. This is no ``Chicken Little'' story. Without congressional action, the sky will fall in, doctors will be unable to participate in Medicare and our seniors will be left without care--regardless of Obamacare reforms.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3962. I cannot and will not support this government takeover of our health care system that will restrict choice, ration care, increase the cost of health care, greatly increase government spending, and lead to the destruction of the world's best medical care. Americans are fed up with Washington's out of control spending, with more and more power over their daily lives being put in the hands of nameless, unaccountable bureaucrats, and with the systematic shift of the United States Government from a government OF the people to a government FOR the people. The growing discontent began with the bloated stimulus bill that did nothing but grow a bigger Washington and create more bureaucratic jobs. It increased with the government takeover of General Motors, the cap and tax bill, the placement of power in the hands of unconfirmed and unconstitutional czars, and the grossly inflated spending bills passed for fiscal year 2010. With the Democrat attempt to takeover health care, the discontent has now come to a full boil. This spring, summer and fall the American people have spoken loudly and clearly about what they do and do not want in health care reform. The Democrats ignored these sentiments and introduced H.R. 3200 and the two Senate bills. This led to the most lively, spirited town halls in my 15 years in Congress, followed by an unprecedented number of phone calls, emails and letters sent to my office by concerned Kansans. The American people told us what they do and do not want: they do not want a government takeover of health care, the American people do not want higher taxes, the American people do very much want to keep their health insurance and increase their choices and access for those who do not have insurance. What was the Democrat response to their constituents? A new, bigger bill that again ignores the input of the American people and is even worse than H.R. 3200. The new bill is a government takeover of health care. H.R. 3962 is double the original H.R. 3200 at 1990 pages long and loaded with new mandates. The word ``shall'' appears 3,425 times--in other words--this is the government telling you to do something. The bill creates 118 new bureaucracies. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) calculated the cost of the bill at $1.2 trillion but this does not include 28 instances of hidden costs indicated by the ominous words indicating that certain programs be appropriated ``such sums as may be necessary.'' The bill raises taxes, on individuals and job creators, including a $461 billion surtax on small businesses according to the U.S. Chamber of Congress. The Pelosi bill will result in 5.5 million job losses at a time when unemployment is already over 10 percent. And to top all of that off--this bill completely rewrites 16th of our nation's economy. H.R. 3962 cuts benefits to seniors, does not ensure that Americans can keep their health insurance, limits choice, covers even more illegal immigrants than H.R. 3200 (2.5 million more according to CRS), and allows for taxpayer funded abortions. If H.R. 3962 is enacted into law, even the Democrats acknowledge that health care costs will increase. As PJ O'Rourke said, ``If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free.'' My biggest concern with the Democrat proposals is the intended rationing of health care. The Obama administration has already begun to set the framework for rationed care with comparative effectiveness research. This is a very dangerous road to travel down. In addition to all the other concerns I am also opposed to the Baucus and Pelosi attempt to destroy Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). HSAs are what we should be promoting as a way to expand choice, give patients more control over their medical spending, and reduce health care costs. I want health care reform and am saddened that this process has become so political that we won't see the much needed modernization that will ensure Americans have access to the best health care for decades to come. I am saddened that states like my home state of Kansas are forced to take drastic action to try to protect their citizens from being affected by Washington's takeover of health care. Republicans have offered better solutions and principles that should be included in any health care reform. Those principles should: let Americans who like their health coverage keep it, give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs; ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats; and improve Americans' lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases. The Republican 219 page bill is a plan that will lower cost and improve health care access. This bill includes: tax incentives; Association Healthcare Options to let Americans group together for greater purchasing power; limitations on defensive medicine and implementing comprehensive medical liability reform; tackling waste, fraud and abuse (a $10 Billion annual cost to taxpayers generated from Medicare alone); and incentives for savings and increased use of personal Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). In addition, the Republican plan will ensure that Americans are not prevented from health coverage due to pre-existing conditions and are not subject to lifetime caps on treatment. Unlike the Pelosi and Obama plans, the Republican plan protects Medicare for seniors. Finally, the Republican plan protects taxpayers from funding abortions or health insurance for illegal immigrants. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the Republican bill will lower premiums for the American people by up to 10 percent. Under our plan, premiums for families and small businesses would be nearly $5,000 per year lower. I strongly encourage my colleagues to vote for the Republican substitute that will provide real solutions that will meet the needs of the American people. Our constituents have spoken loudly and clearly and it is our duty as their representatives to listen to them, not ignore them and use the sacred Speaker's gavel to impose personal political goals upon them.

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to both the rule and to the massive government takeover of health care that is before us today. There are a large number of issues that I could raise, but right now I would like to focus on one of the most blatant examples of disregard for the will of the American people found within this bill. The bill includes abortions paid for by federal dollars. For more than 30 years, the United States federal government has not been in the business of providing funding for abortion. Since 1976 the Hyde amendment has struck a delicate, but respectful balance between those who support abortion and those who do not. While it does not make abortion illegal, it protects those who oppose abortion from being forced to support it with their taxpayer dollars. This is a fair compromise that should be included in the H.R. 3962. Public opinion is clear on this issue. A number of polls have been conducted in the last couple of months confirming that Americans do not support federal funding of abortion. A Rasmussen Reports poll from September found that only 13 percent of Americans support abortion coverage by government-backed health insurance. A Public Option Strategies poll from September found that only 8 percent of Americans would be more likely to support a health care bill if it included federal funding for abortions. A whopping two-thirds of Americans oppose using federal dollars to pay for abortions, according to the September International Communications Research poll. This is like every other aspect of this health care bill--the American people do not want it, but Democrat leadership is attempting to ram it down our throats anyway. This is why I support the Stupak-Pitts amendment. Their amendment would extend the same restrictions found in the Hyde amendment to cover this bill as well. It does not outlaw or prohibit abortion, or restrict those who wish to have an abortion from seeking one. But it does prevent federal dollars from being used to pay for those abortions. I am pleased that we will be allowed to debate the Stupak-Pitts amendment, even without assurance that should it pass, the House would retain the language in conference, and I hope that my colleagues vote in favor of the amendment. The Republican bill clearly states that abortions will not be paid for with taxpayer dollars. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Republican bill and against H.R. 3962.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my voice to those supporting S. 1211, honoring the life of Jack Kemp by designating the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 60 School Street, Orchard Park, New York, as the ``Jack F. Kemp Post Office Building.'' Jack was an accomplished and respected politician and athlete. He served his country in the United States Army Reserve and was a professional quarterback for 13 years, probably best known for his time with the San Diego Chargers and Buffalo Bills. He served as a Member of this body from 1971 to 1989, as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 1989 to 1993, and as the Republican Party's nominee for Vice President and presidential nominee Bob Dole's running-mate in the 1996 election. Both as a public official and as a private citizen, Jack was a great voice for common-sense conservatism in America. Laws still bear his name, which is a testament to his effectiveness as a Member of Congress. Jack Kemp left behind a legacy of principled determination and resolve to find practical solutions, not only within the Republican Party, but in the realm of public service as a whole. Even more important than his career accomplishments was Jack's strong character. He had a deep faith that he lived out every day. He cherished his wife Joanne and their four children, making sure that, despite his many roles and responsibilities, he was there for them as a husband and father. I am honored to have known Jack as a colleague and friend, and hope that the designation of the Jack F. Kemp Post Office Building will serve as one of many different recognitions of his life and service to our country. His family remains in our thoughts and prayers, and I encourage my colleagues to keep his memory alive as we work together in the fight for freedom and opportunity for all Americans.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, Speaker Pelosi has more than 250 votes in the House of Representatives and she only needs 218 to pass legislation. The Democrats in the other body control 60 votes out of 100. The Democrats have the White House. They can pass legislation to take over the health care system in spite of what the American people are saying and in spite of what the American people are asking for. Because, you see, the American people do want health care reform; they want to lower the costs; they want to be able to deduct all their health care expenses from their taxes. They want tort reform. They want us to address defensive medicine costs. They want to shop around across State lines so they can get a cheaper price. And they want health savings accounts. But the bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is they want the freedom to control their health care, the freedom to choose their own doctor. Whatever they pass here, Mr. Speaker, I will work to repeal, and I will work for the health care reform that the American public wants to keep them in control of their health care.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, a majority of Americans have had enough with the idea of the government taking over their health care. Americans love freedom and deserve the freedom to choose the health plan that is best for their family. This week, in the great State of Kansas, a coalition of State leaders has unveiled the Health Care Freedom Amendment that reserves the right for Kansans to manage their own health care options. As Kansans, we don't want Washington bureaucrats getting in the middle of medical decisions that should be made by patients and their doctors. We believe Kansans and the American people deserve better. That is why I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the Empowering Patients First Act that allows Americans who like their health care coverage the freedom to keep it, and gives Americans the opportunity to choose the health plan that best meets their needs. Our bill also ensures medical decisions are made by patients and their physicians and improves Americans' lives through effective prevention, wellness and disease management programs. This is the only bill that won't dampen the development of new treatments that cure life-threatening diseases. It's time for the Democrats to scrap their current plan, stop the backroom dealing, and start working with Republicans on real health care reform that ensures all Americans have the right to manage their health care options.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I want to thank Ranking Member Simpson for yielding me time. I have to say that I think that he is much better equipped to be the ranking member of the Interior Committee than I was when I was ranking member. I also want to commend Chairman Dicks. I think nobody has been better prepared to be chairman of the Interior Committee than he has, and he has done an excellent job. Yet, Mr. Speaker, we have an honest concern and an honest difference on whether we should have these regulations imposed on the American economy and on American agricultural jobs. There is an onslaught of regulations going on now, and we forget that, when we hire all of these government workers, they have to do something, so we're reminded when they submit these regulations which do nothing but slow our economy and force more unemployment. We also forget that it takes five private-sector jobs to pay for each and every one government job, but we very seldom get the opportunity to talk about how we're going to grow our economy in a positive fashion. Instead, we have to play defense on how we're going to save the jobs we have today. Regulations like this do nothing but force more jobs overseas. They do nothing more than raise unemployment. Is there any belief, when we impose additional regulations as high as this pile is next to me, that it will do nothing less than move agricultural jobs out of America to other countries like Mexico, Brazil and Argentina? Are you convinced that any of those countries will do a better job of regulating this type of production? I don't think they will. Do you think they will do a better job in Mexico or in Brazil or in Argentina of managing animal diseases? We do a very fine job here. When there is a problem, we respond immediately, but I don't see that in those other countries. What we are doing by writing these regulations is forcing production of animals overseas where we will be more vulnerable as a world, where we will have less jobs as America. It's not the type of direction that I think our President wants to go. It's not the type of direction that I think Congress wants to go. We see this not only in agriculture but we also have seen this in manufacturing, where as we grow the regulatory burden, the jobs move overseas. Today, 12 percent of the cost of making anything in America is consumed by just complying with the regulations. As a result we have seen jobs go offshore. Now it's not because we have high wages; we want highly qualified workers. It's not because CEOs are greedy; they can only control so many costs. They cannot control the costs imposed upon their companies by the regulations that they are facing from the Federal Government today. And we are doing this for what reason? So we can control greenhouse gases? I would defy anybody to show a measurable increase or decrease in greenhouse gases because of these regulations, and not only this year or next year, but in the next 50 or 100 years. This is not worth it. It doesn't meet the common sense. I would request that we keep the language that was passed in the Appropriations Committee by Mr. Latham and vote for this motion to instruct.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank Chairman Costello for his leadership on this legislation and also Ranking Member Petri for his help in recognizing Russ Meyer. It's with great pleasure that I come to the floor today to commend Russ W. Meyer, Jr., for his induction into the National Aviation Hall of Fame. In April, Russ joined astronauts Ellen Collins, the late Edward White, and movie legend Jimmy Stewart in the class of 2009. Russ has had a distinguished career both in the private and public arena. While attending Harvard Law School, Russ served with the United States Marine Corps Reserves from 1958 to 1961. After a few years in the private practice of law, Russ entered the aviation industry as president and CEO of Grumman American Aviation Corporation in Cleveland, Ohio. Then Russ came to Wichita, Kansas. Russ joined the Cessna Aircraft Company as executive vice president in June of 1974. One year later he became the chairman and CEO. There are few who have done more for the general aviation community than Russ. He led Cessna, both as chairman and CEO, for a total of 23 years. During his time with Cessna, Russ led the expansion of the Cessna line of business jets, the world's most popular line of mid- sized jets. Russ Meyer recognized that business jets are a tremendous productivity tool. It is productivity that has helped our economy grow. We are the number one economy of the world, and it's not because we have fewer regulations. We have more. It's not because we have the lowest wages. We're among the highest. It's because of visionaries like Russ Meyer who gave the American people the ability to do the same work in less time, making us the most productive and strongest workforce and economy in the world. In the 1980s, the general aviation industry was faced with a tremendous hurdle that threatened to eliminate a big portion of the general aviation aircraft market. Aircraft manufacturers were forced to cease production of their piston-powered aircraft due to liability issues that extended over the life of the aircraft. In response to this threat, Russ put his leadership to work on Capitol Hill. He became one of the principal advocates for the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994. This bill provided limited liability on general aviation aircraft and revitalized the general aviation industry. But this is just one of many contributions Russ has given to the industry as a whole. Far beyond his leadership in the business sector, Russ is also a philanthropist. One person described Russ as one who has a big heart and wants to serve the underserved. This isn't just talk. Russ was the chairman of a campaign to construct a 42,000-square-foot complex for the Boys and Girls Club of South Central Kansas. He led the fundraising effort and raised over $9 million for the project. Russ was also the originator of the Citation Special Olympics Airlift, where hundreds of Citation airplane owners from around the country transport athletes to the national Special Olympic Games. Russ is also a member of the Kansas Aviation Hall of Fame, a Wright Brothers Memorial Trophy holder, has served on three Presidential commissions, and the list goes on. Like many others, I've known Russ to be a man of vision and action. Whenever Russ takes on a project, he has the ability to rally and inspire everyone around him behind a common goal. Every community wants a Russ Meyer. Every community needs a Russ Meyer. The children of South Central Kansas needed him, and Russ delivered. The aircraft industry needed him, and Russ delivered. He's a big reason why Wichita is known as the air capital of the world. Once again, I am pleased today that the United States House of Representatives will congratulate and commend Russ W. Meyer, Jr., on his induction into the National Aviation Hall of Fame.

Mr. TIAHRT. I will be glad to yield to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Washington State, and I appreciate his contributions to the aircraft industry as well. He's been a stalwart in helping us get American jobs made by American companies, American aircraft.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, in the current health care debate we are overlooking access to health care in rural America. For families living in rural towns all across Kansas and America, access to quality health care is often the primary concern. In fact, right now, less than 10 percent of our physicians serve 25 percent of our population. In order to improve access to quality medical care, we need to start with three basic reforms. First, we should reimburse providers for the full cost of care so rural medical professionals can do their job of curing and healing. Second, we should repay enormous debt incurred through medical school so more young people enter general practice and practice care in smaller towns. Finally, the Federal Government should stop picking winners and losers with its coverage decisions in urban versus rural health care, because in every case, rural health care gets shortchanged. We should focus on reforms needed to solve the health care crisis in rural Kansas and in rural America, and, in doing so, we will improve health care delivery to the rest of the Nation. Without addressing these exploding costs or recognition that we need to focus on training new practitioners, the access problems plaguing rural America will only get worse.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, in April 2009 the United Nations (UN) set upon an ``investigation'' and ``fact-finding'' mission into the recent Israel-Gaza border conflict and released a report on findings on September 15th. Although the facts clearly showed that the terrorist Hamas government in Gaza had launched thousands of rockets on Israel prior to any Israeli response, the UN Goldstone Mission came to a surprising conclusion. It found ``violations of international human rights law . . by the occupying power, Israel.'' This outrageous conclusion was predetermined by the originating mandate's anti-Israel bias. After lasting six months and producing a 575-page report, the Goldstone Mission apparently had no interest in fairness or engaging in a real investigation. This ``fact-finding'' mission was nothing more than a charade that demonizes a nation for protecting its own citizens, all the while protecting terrorist organizations and damaging any chance of true peace in the Middle East. The Goldstone Report is just another example of the UNHRC's dismal track record. The Goldstone Report is the epitome of what is wrong with the United Nations in general and the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in particular. Dominated by anti-democratic, anti-Semitic nations opposed to any semblance of human rights, the UNHRC has proven itself to be lacking objectivity and interest in truth or advancing the real cause of human rights. My central concern with the Goldstone Report is the lack of recognition of Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from the internationally-recognized terrorist organization, Hamas, which currently controls Gaza. Despite video documentation, the report alleges no conclusive evidence of Hamas's extraordinary use of civilians and civilian infrastructure for military purposes, and accuses Israel of war crimes. The Goldstone Report shamefully accuses the victims with little mention of the aggressors. It even leaves open the possibility of Israel's prosecution at the International Criminal Court for simply protecting its citizens. No nation can sit idly by while its people are killed, its children are traumatized, and the daily life of its citizens is severely disrupted by terrorism. Ask yourself, would America tolerate 10,000 rockets being launched against our homeland? No, we would protect our people. Israel has the same responsibility to protect its people as it did in Gaza. To suggest otherwise is a failure to accept the facts. Americans look forward to peace in Israel and the Middle East; but until Hamas and its terrorist allies relinquish their arms, renounce violence, and acknowledge the right of Israel to exist, the hope for peace can not be realized. Israel can not do it singlehandedly. The UN must recognize Hamas for what it is--a terrorist organization that prevents peace in the Middle East. The Goldstone Report, by rejecting truth and objectivity, brings us no closer to that ultimate goal. It is a disgrace and should be viewed as such by the international community.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, I rise again to fight on behalf of Kansans who are furious that ACORN, the political machine of President Obama, is being funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to carry out fraudulent and illegal activities. It's no secret President Obama paid ACORN over $800,000 to help him win the White House. For years, this organization has been funded by liberal Democrats, and they have used the money to promote voter fraud and tax fraud, along with other illegal activities. Despite the dozens of ACORN voter fraud scandals and its 70 convicted members, ACORN receives an outrageous 40 percent of its funding from hardworking taxpayers. This must stop. That's why we are fighting to defund this political machine and prevent further abuse of taxpayer money. In addition to taking away every single tax dollar ACORN receives, we should strip its tax-exempt status. That's why this week I am introducing a resolution calling for the IRS to stop giving ACORN special tax treatment. Let's help stop ACORN from using its tax-exempt status to advance liberal political agendas filled with corruption. It's time for Congress to put an end to this fraudulent use of public tax dollars and start working to revive our economy and create jobs.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I want to first thank the gentlewoman from Hawaii for her help in this legislation and for the kind words to Wichita State and also to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who also gave us a wonderful history about this sport and also Wichita State University and his kind words. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to offer House Resolution 455 honoring the 2009 National Champion Wichita State University Shocker men's and women's bowling teams. By its very nature, a national championship is special, but to have both men's and women's teams from the same school earn the same title in the same year is truly remarkable. The Wichita State University men's team entered the elimination portion of the tournament seeded first, a ranking which they held all the way through the finals where they claimed the national championship. The Lady Shockers were ranked second entering the elimination tournament and overcame a difficult schedule on their way to becoming national champions. These championship teams carry on a winning tradition at Wichita State University. This is the ninth national title for each of them, the second consecutive national title for the men, and the third women's national title in 5 years. Wichita State University has been blessed with an incredible coaching staff. Head coach Gordon Vadakin and assistant coach Mark Lewis are both members of the United States Bowling Congress Hall of Fame. Gordon Vadakin has been coaching at Wichita State University since 1976, leading the men's and women's teams to a combined 32 USBC Intercollegiate Bowling National Championship tournaments and winning a record 16 of them. The Wichita State University team has two additional outstanding assistant coaches in Brian Adelgren and Nathan Bohr. I want to congratulate the men's team of Jake Peters, Nick Pahr, Brandon Hall, Josh McBride, Stephen Cowland, Adam Ferri, Kyle Bischoff, Will Barnes, Geoffrey Young, Kevin Tatrow; and Male Collegiate Bowler of the Year runners-up John Szczerbinski and Josh Blanchard; and to the women's team of Melissa Hurst, Maggie Zakrzewski, Suzana Signaigo, Jessica Baker, Samantha Hesley, Mariana Ayala, Daniela Alvarado, Rocio Restrepo, Samantha Linder, and Female Collegiate Bowler of the Year Sandra Gongora. Once again, I am pleased today that the United States House of Representatives will congratulate and commend the Wichita State University men's and women's bowling teams for winning the 2009 Intercollegiate Bowling National Championship Tournament. Go Shox.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act because it will increase our deficit, but not help Americans with the expense of college. This bill is just one more area where the President and his party's leadership in the House are seeking to take over private industry. This is yet another one-size-fits-all government program intended to cripple the private sector and force additional financial risk on the American taxpayer. In the last few months, we have watched the national debt level grow at an unprecedented rate. We spent billions of dollars bailing out the automobile industry. We have thrown good money after bad to prop up portions of the financial sector that we are told are ``too big to fail.'' We've bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, only to watch the housing industry continue to flounder. We have spent more than $780 billion on a stimulus package that has left us with higher unemployment than we had before the bill. And in the next few weeks, we will need to raise the debt ceiling again. Claims that this bill will save the nation billions of dollars look like a budget gimmick to pay for new government programs. Government has grown enough in recent years. We need to be looking for ways to save money and reduce our deficit, not spend ``projected savings'' on new, duplicative programs. Furthermore, the money that supporters claim will be made available by these budget gimmicks is only expected to cover the first five years of these new programs. After that, Congress will be forced to find alternative sources of funding for them, or eliminate them. This is as productive as a credit card offering no payments for six months. This is a very poor way to manage the finances of the nation. A second big problem I see with H.R. 3221 is the federalization of the student loan industry. If we run out of money for this program in the future, what happens to the students? With no private lenders, the students are left without any other source of funding for their education. Fifteen years ago, when the federal government first got involved in the business of providing student loans, Congress was told that this was not an attempt for the federal government to take over the student loan industry, but simply a way to improve the system, and provide ``competition'' to the private sector. Yet, fifteen years later, here we are, debating a bill that would force private lenders out of the industry. Does this argument sound familiar? It should. These are the same explanations being offered today by the President and by Democrat leaders in the House and Senate on health care. We are told that the bill will not lead to a government takeover of health care. Proponents say that a ``government option'' will simply compete, not replace, private health insurance plans. But I wonder, if the health care bill were to pass, how long would it be before this body is having a similar vote to eliminate private health insurance plans. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against this bill. This is a big government takeover of a private industry that will saddle taxpayers with the risk of billions in additional debt, while shrinking access to resources for future generations of students. In short, Madam Speaker, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from Kansas for yielding and thank him for his leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I am a little puzzled why this discussion has come up this afternoon. This has been a long selection process to get NBAF to where it is located today. Many facilities were researched. They looked at it. They decided the best place in all of America, based on past history, based on facility, based on geography, based on the plan and place was to select Manhattan, Kansas. Now, we have the same similar lab research going on around America today and also in Canada. In fact, there are facilities at Fort Detrick, Maryland, very close here to Washington, D.C. It's considered safe even though the research there is somewhat as dangerous, if not more dangerous, to humans than what we are discussing today. We also have CDC laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, and in other high- population areas, places in Texas have similar research going on. But in Winnipeg, Canada, they have the very same research going on 70 miles from the United States border and in the cattle country of Canada, and yet there are no concerns. Now, the NBAF facility is going to be the same, whether you locate it in Kansas or Georgia or Texas or whether somebody else here would like to have it in their home district. We are going to have plans in place to make sure that this is a well-protected facility, a level 4 security, BSL 4, as it is referred to. It is going to be safe, it's going to be effective, and it's going to provide the continuation of a low-cost, stable food supply that is marketable worldwide because of the safety research. So for us to put a red herring out there that this is not a safe facility or that there are some concerns, you know, this has been studied by DHS. They do have a preliminary plan in place, God forbid something should ever happen, but they are satisfied that this level 4 facility is going to meet the requirements.

Mr. TIAHRT. One point I would like to make is that in Kansas State we have been doing similar research for quite some time in the past decade, completely safe in a level 4 facility. We can start the beginning of this research today. The only thing that's really holding this up is this lack of funding, and there is something critical going on in the funding scheme. The Federal Government has promised to come up with 36 million. It's going to be matched by the State of Kansas. But if we delay the construction, we delay the protections that would be put in place. And it's very shortsighted for us to question, after the fact, all the research, all the decisions, the fairness in the process and the decision that was made. It was a good decision. It's the right location. We are going to move forward with this to protect our food supply and protect the people of America and make marketable agricultural products worldwide.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, last night President Obama told us that his administration would tackle medical malpractice reform as a way to lower health care costs. Defensive medicine practices do drive up the cost of health care. It's at least 10 percent of overall cost and as much as 40 percent of some procedures, and it should be aggressively tackled. This is what we have been saying on the Republican side for years. But who is it? Who will take on this difficult task? And just how committed is President Obama in taking on medical malpractice reform and protecting medical providers from trial lawyers? A simple Google search shows that Secretary Sebelius was the executive director and the head lobbyist for the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association for 8 years. That's right, Secretary Sebelius, head of the Health and Human Services, was a deep political professional and has personal ties with trial lawyers and has been tapped by the President to go after these same trial lawyers and figure out just what kind of malpractice reform should be put in place. I think this is a classical example of what we call a conflict of interest. The President has made several publicly embarrassing gaffes recently, and when it comes to vetting these people, I would hope that he takes more time in vetting Secretary Sebelius.

Mr. TIAHRT

Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, in accordance with the Republican Earmark Standards Guidance, I submit the following in regard to the Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act found in H.R. 3326: Portable Military Radio Communications Test Set The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $1,500,000 for Portable Military Radio Communications Test Set in the Marine Corps, Procurement Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Aeroflex at 10200 West York Road, Wichita, KS 67215-8999. The Portable Military Radio Communications Test Set was developed with the military in mind with its portability, rugged build, and weight. The technician can easily perform maintenance checks of radio systems (including antennas & cables); perform diagnostics or troubleshooting of faulty radio systems in order to repair or restore the radio systems. The test set is portable, weighing in at only 8.5 lbs (including the battery). It operates from a rechargeable battery with about 5 hours operating time. With the additional capability to perform quick testing of antennas and cables, the Portable Military Radio Communications Test Set provides for the tester to isolate problems and assess performance of the radio, cable, and antenna systems. It was designed to significantly reduce the number of radios incorrectly removed from vehicles where it was later determined to have no trouble found. The Marine Corps pays about $10,000 for each tester, with a requirement for 1600 units. This funding will go to procurement of the testers to meet this requirement. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Radio Personality Modules for SINCGARS Test Sets The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $3,000,000 for Radio Personality Modules for SINCGARS Test Sets in the Army, Other Procurement Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Aeroflex at 10200 West York Road, Wichita, KS 67215-8999. The funds will fund Radio Personality Modules for SINCGARS Test Sets which capitalizes upon existing radio test sets by making them up to 10 times more capable than they were before. Presently, the GRM-122 test set diagnoses only one type of radio--the SINCGARS. After the proposed upgrade, the very same tester will be able to test multiple radios in common use, including: UHF radios, VHF radios, high frequency radios, intercoms, survival vest radios, and four different types of navigation radios installed in aircraft on the flight line. This efficient program saves both time and money. Time, because the technician performing the test will have the entire test suite he requires at his immediate disposal on the flight line; and money because the Aviation Intermediate Maintenance locations equipped with Radio Personality Modules for SINCGARS Test Sets will not need to acquire nor carry entire test suites of disparate equipments. This funding is for procurement of these test sets. The cost of each test suite is $157,946--there is a need for about 80 test sets in all. The anticipated source of funding for the duration of the project is funding from the government; the customer is the US Army. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Directed Energy Systems for UAV Payloads The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $1,000,000 for Directed Energy Systems for UAV Payloads in the Defense-wide, RDT&E Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is ARC Technology at 13076 NW 120th St., Whitewater, KS 67154. ARC anticipates that federal funds will complete the research and development of this technology. This technology enables both offensive and defensive capabilities from UAV platforms that are either controlled or autonomous. Targets of interest include remotely controlled devices, communications systems, computers, electronics, radar systems, infrared and acoustic sensors, and GPS jammers. The FY 10 funding addresses additional integration issues, range extension, packaging issues, and customer performance verification for incorporation into specific delivery platforms. Budget for UAV Payload Directed Energy Systems Materials--5% Labor--70% Testing--15% Performance verification*--10% Total--100% * Per customer specifications, to simulate performance in end applications. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. B-52 Tactical Data Link Program The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $6,000,000 for B52 Tactical Data Link (TDL) Program in the Air Force, Research and Development account. This project is for The Boeing Corporation located at P.O. Box 7730 MC K71-33, Wichita, KS 67277-7730. The B-52 Combat Communications Network Technology (CONECT) Capabilities Description Document (CDD) identified mission area capability gaps that supplied rationale for Line-of-sight (LOS) Tactical Data Link (TDL) communications. These mission area capability gaps continue to exist for missions that the B-52 has been tasked to perform. Current planned B-52 CONECT Phase A capability, slated for IOC in 2011, relies on low-speed data links that are not jam-resistant and will not meet specific mission area goals. To meet mission goals within theater operations (300 nautical miles or less), a jam-resistant, low- latency tactical data link capability is required. Original B-52 CONECT program effort included the integration of a LOS TDL capability per the CDD requirements. During FY2005, the LOS TDL component and associated funding was removed from the program. The current B-52 CONECT program includes a two phase delivery with the initial capability (Phase A) providing low-speed BLOS and LOS communications that are not jam-resistant followed by an additional phase that adds the Family of Advanced BLOS Terminals (FAB-T) Airborne Wideband Terminal (AWT) for enhanced jam-resistant BLOS reach-back capability to the B-52. The initial phase of the program provided significant computing hardware integration and infrastructure as the basis for future communications data link integration on the B-52. Full integration of a LOS TDL on the B-52 involves significant effort to design, test, and certify the system for operational use. The original B-52 CONECT program solution set involved integrating the MIDS JTRS terminal that has been under development since FY2004. This architecture involved integration of the legacy Link-16 Tactical waveform. Numerous platforms have integrated the Link-16 Waveform capability to participate in a LOS tactical environment. Since that time, new technologies and concepts of operation have been assessed by the DoD community. Assurance will need to be established as to whether the Link-16 waveform is the proper transport of choice or if alternate waveform transports will be required. When developing Network-Centric architectures, robust system engineering efforts will need to be performed to establish and obtain agreement on concepts of operations and operational needlines and timelines for interoperability (i.e. establish who we are talking with and how). Effort will need to be expended to determine these interoperability solutions. Proposed Project Activities: Develop DoD architecture products within an Information Support Plan (ISP) to provide mission area justification for LOS TDL integration Perform analysis of alternatives (AOA) to determine terminal selection and transport/waveform requirements to meet operational needlines Develop candidate requirements/architecture definition utilizing original B-52 CONECT TDL architecture as a basis for integration and ensure stakeholder concurrence through design review. Perform aircraft installation trade studies to identify any potential issues with integration (size, weight, power, cooling, antenna performance) Perform lab demonstration of capability using government-supplied LOS terminal assets in the Wichita B-52 SIL Deliver draft SSS modifications and System Design modifications that will provide the basis for a follow-on proposal to complete integration of a LOS TDL capability Project Estimates: Requirement integration with existing CONECT architecture ($1.8M--8 folks for 6 months (about $1.4M to contractor with $0.4M to customer) Prototype design in SIL ($3.7M--12 months for 10 folks ($3.2M to contractor with $0.5M to customer) Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) Equipment--$0.5M (Two TDL Terminals and ancillary equipment) At the completion of the project effort, a preliminary requirements definition and architecture design understanding will be established between the government and Boeing. This would serve as the basis for a follow-on Request for Proposal (RFP) for the full SDD development effort to integrate the LOS TDL capability on the B-52. In addition, the effort will establish an Information Support Plan which supports and validates the CDD requirements and addresses mission area gaps that would be filled with a LOS TDL capability. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Civil Air Patrol (CAP) Aircraft The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $7,426,000 for Civil Air Patrol (CAP) Aircraft in the Air Force, Aircraft Procurement Account, of which $5,000,000 is a Congressional add. The entity to receive funding for this project is Cessna Aircraft Company at 3 Cessna Blvd, Wichita, Kansas 67215. The CAP provides the least expensive airborne emergency services and Homeland Security services of any agency at approximately $100 per flying hour. The CAP budgets through the USAF for acquisition of new aircraft to modernize the fleet, maintain operational readiness, and contribute to the Homeland Security. The additional funding will procure additional aircraft for CAP. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Demonstration Project for COHORT/ACIMS: Composite Occupational Health and Operational Risk Tracking System/Advanced Concept Information Management System The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $3,000,000 for Demonstration Project for COHORT/ACIMS: Composite Occupational Health and Operational Risk Tracking System / Advanced Concept Information Management System. The entity to receive funding for this project is Spin Systems located at 3450 North Rock Road, Bldg #200, Suite 202. This project leverages the successes of the COHORT/ACIMS I & II projects that developed the Armed Forces Medical Analysis and Collaboration Tool (AFMAC) using the Spin Business Framework (SBF). AFMAC was designed by an AF/SG physician epidemiologist to analyze and track ``Injured Airmen'' as a proof of concept. Both tasks are necessary to fully realize the power of putting actionable information in the hands of doctors and nurses carrying for our sick and injured. Task 1: Enterprise Medical Management Framework. This funding is to develop a clinical business intelligence and ``bedside'' case management support tool for nurses and doctors using the SBF-AFMAC framework. This tool will provide access to real-time, consolidated health information and hands-on tools to assist them in coordinating care for wounded warriors and other MHS patients. These tools will assist with case management, care coordination, team collaboration, workflow management, secure messaging, notifications and alerts, documentation creation and management, metrics, dashboards and forecasting. Our clinical teams are missing these tools, which have been identified by the AF/SG's Family Health Initiative as essential to success. The AFMS has advised the need for additional work in the amount of $1.8M. Finance Plan: Labor--57%, ODC--5%, Materials (Enterprise License/ Hardware)--38%. Task 2: Real-Time Data Delivery. This funding is to develop a modern solution to provide a quick, efficient, standardized and secure mechanism for delivering data from centralized information systems and databases into the hands of the doctors and nurses at the bedside and in the clinic. Providing a near- real time data delivery system will take full advantage of valuable but separate data systems and put the information in the hands of clinicians, medical technicians and health administrators without delay, duplication or redundancy. Real-time data delivery will save manpower and resources in the IT community in addition to improving health and saving lives. The AFMS has advised the need for $1.2M in additional work in this area. Finance Plan: Labor--82%, ODC--5%, Materials (Enterprise Licenses/ Hardware)--13%. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Demonstration Project for Contractors Employing Persons with Disabilities The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $4,000,000 for Demonstration Project for Contractors Employing Persons with Disabilities in the Air Force, Operation & Maintenance. The entities to receive funding for this project is Cerebral Palsy Research Foundation located at 5111 East 21st Street Wichita, Kansas 67208 and Envision located at 2301 South Water, Wichita, Kansas 67213. The program is authorized under H.R. 1588; Demonstration Project for Contractors Employing Persons With Disabilities. The purpose of the demonstration project is to provide jobs for people with severe disabilities who otherwise would not be fully employed. The national unemployment rate for people with severe disabilities is 70%. It is in the national best interest for the government to provide, and fund, programs which have as a purpose to lower this rate. Disabled individuals employed under the Demonstration Project are able to live independent lives and are able to pay their share of employment taxes and income taxes. These individuals, when employed, contribute to the growth of our economy. As a result of the Demonstration Project for Contractors Employing Persons with Disabilities, the U.S. Air Force Printing Office has engaged in an ongoing relationship with Envision Corporation in Wichita, Kansas. This relationship has been very successful in accomplishing not only the goal of furthering employment opportunities for the blind, but also in providing the U.S. Air Force Printing Office with funding and manpower it would otherwise not have. To date, the U.S. Air Force has advised of the need for additional work totaling approximately $8 Million. As a result of the Demonstration Project for Contractors Employing Persons with Disabilities, the U.S. Air Force Office of Personnel and Management has engaged in an ongoing relationship with The Cerebral Palsy Research Foundation in Wichita, Kansas. This relationship has been very successful in accomplishing not only the goal of furthering employment opportunities for the severely disabled, but also in providing the U.S. Air Force Office of Personnel and Management with funding and manpower it would otherwise not have for the purpose of digitizing all paper records of its personnel. To date, the U.S. Air Force has advised of the need for additional work totaling approximately $11 Million. The United States Air Force Personnel community is undergoing the most extensive reengineering effort in history. This effort includes streamlining processes and centralizing where it makes sense to do so by leveraging technology, and shifting the service model to a greater reliance on self-service. A key enabler to achieving the desired end state is a shift from paper-intensive personnel transitions and document storage to a near-paperless environment as spelled out in the AF/A 1 E-Records Strategy document. A key milestone in achieving an E- Record environment is conversion of current paper document repositories into a centralized digital repository. There are approximately 13 million pages of paper records that need to be scanned. Currently we are operating in option year three of a five year plan. No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. Laser Peening for Friction Stir Welded Aerospace Structures The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $2,000,000 for Laser Peening for Friction Stir Welded Aerospace Structures in the Department of the Air Force, RDT&E Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Curtiss-Wright Metal Improvement Company at 1618 Ida, Wichita, Kansas 67211. The program will demonstrate the benefits of laser peening on subscale components with identical geometry of targeted DoD aircraft components, quantify anticipated improvement in performance, lifetime extension and cost reduction of full size DoD aircraft components, and demonstrate the technology for use with large wing structures to achieve substantial material and operational savings for the military. Funding will support the following activities: Engineering and Planning--$90,000 Test Article Design & Analysis--$280,000 Test Article Fabrication--$310,000 Test Article Welding--$80,000 Test Article Laser Peening--$120,000 Test Article Fatigue Testing--$400,000 Engineering Applications for Aircraft component Evaluation--$270,000 Analysis & Reporting--$220,000 Overhead & Administration--$220,000 No matching funds are required for this Department of Defense project. C-130 Active Noise Cancellation Systems The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $3,000,000 for C-130 Active Noise Cancellation Systems in the Department of the Air Force, Aircraft Procurement Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Global Aviation Technologies, located at 2629 W May, Wichita, Kansas 67213. Justification of federal funding: ANCS is a program of record, and federal funds have been appropriated each year since the FY-06. The ANCS System is included in the Air National Guard FY-09 Weapons Systems Modernization Requirements desired capabilities list. The C-130 Active Noise Cancellation (ANC) is a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) product that will reduce crew fatigue and associated hearing loss by greatly reducing the unhealthy noise levels in the C-I30 cockpit. Over 700 ANC systems are in use throughout the world in commercial airline applications, and the system has been fully tailored for the C-130H with no additional non-recurring integration work required. The system has been proven highly reliable in commercial use and requires no scheduled maintenance. C-130 cockpit noise exceeds 100 decibels, a noise level at which it is difficult to communicate clearly, and which causes fatigue and loss of crew coordination. Additionally, this noise level is well above the permanent hearing loss threshold (established by OSHA at 85 decibels). The Ultra ANC system cancels noise by introducing equal amplitude/opposite phase sound into the cockpit via a distributed speaker system. A sophisticated control system samples the noise throughout the cockpit several times a second and drives the speaker outputs to provide maximum quieting. The anticipated installed price will be $260K per C-130 aircraft. No matching funds are required for the Department of Defense program. AT-6B Capabilities Demonstration for the Air National Guard The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $7,000,000 for AT-6B Capabilities Demonstration for the Air National Guard in the Air Force, RDT&E--Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Hawker Beechcraft Corporation at 9709 E Central Ave, Wichita, Kansas 67201. The funding would be for the development of an AT-6B. The Air National Guard (ANG), has stated a requirement to fill equipment capability gaps in support of the mission to conduct for Irregular Warfare operations, Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) Training, as well as Homeland Defense, Homeland Security, and Civil Support mission capabilities training that support DoD, DHS, and State mission requirements. The AT-6B is an affordable, sustainable and responsive aircraft tailored to the NetCentric intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and light attack missions. The AT-6B meets the needs of top level US National Strategic Guidance, including recent Quadrennial Defense Review recommendations, at a fraction of the cost and a fraction of the infrastructure requirements of conventional jet fighters. The AT-6B offers the US Air Force and Air National Guard an asset tailored to increase airman-to-airman engagement with partner Air Forces vital to meeting US national security objectives. It is a crosscutting enabler critical to expanding foreign partnerships and expanding partnership airpower capacity. Estimated cost of the AT-6B capabilities flight demonstration is approximately $21 million. Approximately $14 million = Industry costs to build and provide a mission system equipped AT-6B demonstrator aircraft. Hawker Beechcraft will provide this portion of the total cost. The capital investment required to deliver an operational flight demonstration aircraft also leverages a significant corporate IR&D investment made to develop the AT-6B aircraft which is not included in the $14 million industry contribution. In addition to the actual capital investment in building the aircraft, the contractor also intends to provide sensors and other mission equipment on loan to the Air Force in support of the demonstration, thereby further reducing government costs. Approximately $7 million = Government costs to fund government-run flight test, including: government program management costs, range instrumentation costs, aircraft operating costs, Air Force directed mission equipment integration costs, and contractor engineering and support services in support of demonstration. No matching funds are required for the Department of Defense program. Development of Improved Lighter-Weight IED/EFP Armor Solutions The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, H.R. 3326, contains $2,000,000 for Development of Improved Lighter-Weight IED/EFP Armor Solutions in the Department of the Army, RDT&E Account. The entity to receive funding for this project is Leading Technology Composites at 2626 West May, Wichita, KS 67213. This funding is to develop and field Lightweight IED/EFP Armor Solutions for the US Military. These improved solutions will reduce weight, increase payload and maneuverability, and defeat the current battlefield threats. Innovative solutions to reduce current system weights result in increased payload, maneuverability. Finance Plan: Materials--40% Processing--10% Test and Analysis--30%