Glenn Thompson

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, in 2008, the President and the House of Representatives lifted the 24-year-old moratorium on offshore oil and gas production on most of our Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Back in March, President Obama pushed for offshore oil drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic coast through 2017. Then in April, the BP oil spill happened. That disaster is certainly a cautionary tale. Yet, in the first week in December, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, without an act of Congress or a Presidential executive order, single-handedly prohibited offshore energy development from 2012 to 2017--a 5-year plan for offshore leasing. In reality, this change means no new production can even begin until 2022, if then. That is not the way to reduce our rising dependence on foreign oil or to solve our unemployment problem or our lack of economic growth. We must learn our lessons from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and proceed with care--but we must proceed. President Obama, through Secretary Salazar and strangulation by regulation, has set back our country's path to energy security by at least 12 years, which is certain to produce higher energy prices and to and increase our dependence on foreign imports--hardly sound energy policy.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I appreciate that. For my whole life as a young boy, I grew up in a family-owned sporting goods business. It wasn't a very big operation. It really was my mom and dad, a brother and a sister. The store was open 7 days a week and for 12-hour days. As a teenager, I remember I had the 6 a.m. shift on Saturday mornings.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Yes, absolutely. This is our 151st anniversary. But I was talking with an individual whose family actually had roots maybe going back 151 years. I was talking with this gentleman, and he has a family business. His family has been in this business for at least 100 years or more. And he talked about how just during his lifetime--now this is just his lifetime--he has had to purchase his family business from the government three times, every time a generation has passed away. That's just morally wrong, and it's economically stupid. The fact is this is a company that has, for over a century, created and provided really good jobs for that community, for that part of Pennsylvania.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Yeah. And the fact is, and it seems like he's embraced, he's figured out who those job creators are. I mean, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they'll be the first to, and I'm sure when we get into, more into this debate, you're going to hear them talking about all we're doing is providing tax relief for the wealthy, and the top 2 percent of wage earners in this country fall into that category. It's, by definition, it's people that make $200,000 or more a year and file their taxes individually, or $250,000 and file jointly with their spouse. And you know, in my congressional district, and I suspect in yours, that's a lot of money. But when we really look and drill down a little further and see exactly who those people are, and it's amazing to me to find that it's the people that are reflected on that chart with creating, it's the job creators that created those jobs that showed up after those tax cuts in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, because 60 percent of those folks or more are people who organized their businesses as a sole proprietorship, a limited liability corporation, or a sub chapter corporation. And they pay their taxes as an individual. So, yeah, maybe they make $200,000 as an individual or $250,000, but out of that, they make a payroll. They create jobs. They provide prosperity, both for themselves, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's the American Dream, to work hard, to take risk, to sacrifice and to achieve great things. That's the American Dream. And so that needs to be rewarded. But also they create prosperity for other people. Those are the job creators. And I am so thankful that President Obama has, in a very enlightened way, embraced that in coming together in this bipartisanship of his making, extending these tax cuts. Now, honestly, I would really like to see, if I had, if I was king for the day, and I think you all would agree, we'd make them permanent because that's the best way to provide continued certainty in the future. But this is Washington.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I felt like I was getting up in the middle of night back then. In the hunting season, there was ammunition and supplies. In the fishing season, it was bait and minnows; but it was a wonderful way to grow up and to be able to see and to live the private sector, because that's what it was. We were immersed in it, and it was very positive from that standpoint of interacting with the public. At the same time, it was a front row seat on just how many burdens the government can layer on business and on jobs. Whether it was taxes, whether it was regulations, they were just incredible, incredible burdens. You know, I guess I have very fond memories, but I have some very useful lessons that I take from those early years. I then went on into health care and created jobs and managed rehabilitation services and worked within a skilled nursing facility. We're talking taxes tonight and the impending, looming taxes that will go into effect here January 1. Probably about 2 months ago, I was in Titusville, Pennsylvania; it's where one of my district offices is. We just happened to be having an event there one evening. Titusville may sound familiar to those who remember their history. That's where we drilled oil for the first time anywhere in the world in Titusville, Pennsylvania, 150 years ago. We are very proud of that. We call it the valley that changed the world with the discovery of oil. But I was talking----

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Which is a part of the American Dream.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I like to call it what it is: it's a death tax. And we know that today, as a result of these tax cuts, the schedule that was set up almost 10 years ago, for someone that passes away in 2010, the death tax is zero percent.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Because of the--I guess the official word is the ``estate'' tax.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Well, first of all, I want to thank my good friend from Missouri for hosting this hour. This is a very important issue. We are facing, without action and intervention, the largest tax increase in the history of our country. And the Laffer Curve and the professor that put that together, very smart man. And I think it's very telling. I think that actually it could be named, take a little creative license, and in addition to being a Laffer Curve, a curve of uncertainty, or certainty. Because there is some point in there, and you have already mentioned that word, that you either have certainty in the economy, and jobs are created, and economic development happens, or you have uncertainty and things come to a screeching halt. And that's what we've seen over this past 2 years-plus in terms of the economy. And that's jobs. And the one thing I tell people, or what I hear when I go around and I talk with the people at home--frankly, I talk with the people who are the job creators--it's uncertainty in the economy. And a lot of that has to do with taxes. They don't know what taxes are coming. They have been not just these--and some people will call these the Bush era tax cuts. Frankly, I will call them the people's tax cuts. We have been enjoying them for almost a decade now. It's been money in the pockets of the people at home. They are making decisions. But it's not just those; it's all the taxes that have been layered on bill after bill by this Democratic Congress over the past 2 years. And I've talked with many people who are--normally every year they will take part of their profit--and that's not a bad word. That's a good word. That's what's made our country strong. And they will take that profit, and they will reinvest it in their businesses. They will build a new location or they will add a service line or a product line or maybe they are just repacking something, yes, freshen it up, and they hire people. When they do that, they create prosperity, they create jobs, and they are sitting on the sidelines right now. And a big part of that has to do, I believe, with these taxes, that with no intervention by January 1, the largest tax increase in the history of our country goes into place.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, last week the Democrats brought back the death tax. This calendar year, there has been no estate tax, and I guess in some ways it was the year to die. But on January 1, because of the actions of the House Democrats, the death tax roars back at a rate of 55 percent after the first $1 million. Now that means that your heirs pay nothing on the first million dollars that you leave them, but they pay 55 percent tax on every dollar beyond that. I talked to a constituent recently who says just during his lifetime, he and his family had bought the family business back from the government three times, every time a generation passed away. In other words, the heirs have had to essentially buy back that family business over and over again. Now, a million dollars sounds like a lot of money to most of us, but when you are talking about acreage or buildings, equipment, homes, inventory, even livestock if you are talking about a family farm, it isn't hard to exceed the first exemption. Small businesses can easily be punished by this tax. Why is it fair to essentially ask people to buy back a large portion of their family farms or businesses on which they already pay taxes? Ask the Democrats.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of the National Day of Recognition for Parents of Children with Special Needs to honor those who have dedicated themselves to making the lives of their special needs children better and more fulfilling. I saw a news program over the Thanksgiving holiday that talked about a time in this country when children who were different or had special needs were often institutionalized or forgotten. That was less than 50 years ago. There are still children who need extreme care that can't be given by their parents alone, but many of these parents begin a journey with their special needs child with a goal of making their lives as complete and stimulating as possible. The journey takes them through medical journals and expert opinions. It often places them in opposition to established school procedures and leads them to new solutions to pave the way for other special needs students. It takes their time, their treasure, and most of all their love and patience. These parents don't give up or give in, and their children are the better for it.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, the Small Business Administration's chief counsel for advocacy, Winslow Sargeant, testified today in the Senate that the form 1099 requirement of the health care bill should be repealed. As a cosponsor of H.R. 5141, a bill by Congressman Dan Lungren to repeal that section, this was music to my ears. In his testimony before the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, Sargeant said, ``The form 1099 requirement will greatly increase the reporting and recordkeeping burdens on small businesses.'' As part of the health care bill, this section requires small businesses to issue an Internal Revenue Service form 1099 to any individual or corporation from which they purchase more than $600 in goods or services. Mr. Sargeant went on to cite a recent study by his office that indicated that firms with fewer than 20 employees pay $10,585 per employee on average to comply with Federal regulations. And we wonder why small businesses aren't hiring. It's time to repeal this burden and to work to get government regulations off the backs of our job creators. The true economic stimulus is the small businesses of this Nation, and they need our help.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Next week will mark the 8-month anniversary of the new health care law. When we started this debate almost 2 years ago, I relied on my longtime experience in the medical field to come up with four principles that I strongly believe should be in any health care reform. The first was that health care reform should lower costs. That has yet to happen under this law. Instead, the Federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projected that overall national health spending would increase an average of 6.3 percent a year over the next decade under the new law. In addition, the law imposes more than half a trillion dollars in tax increases. It imposes more than $210 billion in new payroll taxes that could hit small business owners. The Medicare actuary has reported that health care costs would actually increase over the next decade by a total of $310.8 billion. The Congressional Budget Office, or the CBO, wrote that most of the major saving proposals in the health care law are ``widely expected'' to be scaled back or would be difficult to sustain for a long period. That means higher deficits. The second principal for health care reform is that it should increase access to care. That has yet to happen under the new law. Instead, major health insurance companies in California and other States simply have decided to stop selling policies for children rather than complying with the new Federal law that bars them from rejecting youngsters with preexisting conditions. While these insurance companies are not distinguishing themselves, the reality is that they will always look out for their bottom line. The Medicare actuary found that provisions in the law will cause as many as 40 percent of Medicare providers to become unprofitable over time, thus ``providers would have to withdraw from providing services to Medicare beneficiaries.'' This will mean problems with access to care. An example is, in Texas, over the last 2 years, more than 300 primary care physicians have stopped seeing seniors. My third principle is that we should preserve the innovations and improvements that have allowed this country to pioneer new treatments, medications, and equipment. Yet, under this law, there will be $107 billion in taxes on drug and device manufacturers and insurers. That is more money for taxes and less money for innovation. The bill requires small businesses to file 1099 forms to any vendor with which they spend more than $600 in a given year. That will affect 40 million businesses that will be involved in increased paperwork at a huge cost, detracting from their ability to invest in research and development. Finally, I believe that any reform of our health care system should preserve the decisionmaking process between the patient and the patient's physician, not the government, not a bureaucrat, and certainly not anyone from a health insurance company, but the new health care law does just the opposite. In one estimate, the law creates 159 various bureaucracies and commissions, Mr. Speaker. In fact, the Congressional Research Service essentially threw its hands up in the air and concluded ``the precise number of entities that will be created is currently unknowable.'' The administration has released 4,103 pages of regulations and is still going strong. Soon the government will be in control of every aspect of health care, but I assume that was the ultimate goal. This 2,700-page law is, as the CRS says, ``currently unknowable.'' Our Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, had it right when she said the House would ``have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.'' Yet what we do know about it violates all four of the principles on which any health care reform should be based. I supported the Republican alternative 6 months ago, H.R. 3400, the Empowering Patients First Act. It includes my principles and it deserves support.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to give credit to a coach who has just reached the milestone of a 400th career win. It was almost 2 months ago when the Penn State field hockey team shut out Temple University 4-0. They were coached by Charlene Morett, the longest tenured coach in the Big Ten and the seventh-longest tenured coach at a single school in Division I field hockey. She is in her 24th season as head coach of the Penn State field hockey program. This makes her only the fourth Division I field hockey coach in NCAA history to hit the 400-victory plateau. In 2008, Morett led her team to the Big Ten regular season title and was named Big Ten Coach of the Year for the fourth time. Five of her players have been named Big Ten Athlete of the Year. Morett is a graduate of Penn State and an outstanding field hockey player in her own right. She is a two-time Olympian, winning a bronze medal in the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games, and she was also an All- American lacrosse player. I congratulate Morett and her team for their accomplishments.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I have no requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1641, which celebrates September 30 as the 60th anniversary of Impact Aid. The Impact Aid program, now Title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, supports local school districts with concentrations of children who reside on military bases, Indian lands, low-rent housing units, and other Federal properties. Signed into law in 1950, the program is an invaluable resource for local school districts across the United States that have lands within their boundaries that are owned by the Federal Government or have been removed from the local tax rolls by the Federal Government. These school districts face special challenges. They must provide a quality education to the children living on the Indian and other Federal lands and meet Federal education requirements, while sometimes operating with less local revenue than is available to other school districts, because the Federal property is exempt from local property taxes. Under the program, most Impact Aid funds are considered general aid to school districts. Most school districts use the funds to pay the salaries of teachers and teachers' aides; purchase textbooks, computers and other equipment; fund after-school programs and remedial tutoring; fund advanced placement classes and special enrichment programs. It is the only Federal program that is administered locally in order to meet the needs of students in the classroom. In 2010, nearly $1.3 billion will be provided to 1,484 school districts, enrolling more than 1 million federally connected children-- children of our men and women in uniform, children residing on Indian lands, children in low-rent housing, and children of civilians working or living on Federal land. The funding will benefit more than 11 million students who are enrolled in these school districts. Mr. Speaker, for the last 60 years, the Impact Aid program has played an important role in ensuring that all students have access and receive a high-quality public education. I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 1641.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, every minute, three people are diagnosed with diabetes. Every day, almost 200 people undergo an amputation because of the disease. Fifty people go blind and one hundred thirty people enter end-stage kidney disease programs. If current trends continue, one in three children will face a future with diabetes. That is one of the most frightening statistics I have read in a long time. The disease is at epidemic proportions, with nearly 24 million children and adults living with the disease and another 57 million Americans with prediabetic conditions, according to the American Diabetes Association. So what is the cost of this epidemic? Almost one in every five health care dollars is attributed to caring for someone with diabetes. Just in my district in Pennsylvania, a 2007 estimate says it cost more than $323 million. Nationwide the price tag is $218 billion and climbing, but that figure includes complications from undiagnosed diabetes, prediabetic, and gestational diabetes. November is American Diabetes Month. I have cosponsored H. Res. 1690, a resolution recognizing November as American Diabetes Month, and I encourage Members to visit diabetes.org to learn of the ABCs of diabetes and keeping it under control.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Concurrent Resolution 329, which recognizes the 35th anniversary of the enactment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. Thirty-five years ago, President Gerald Ford signed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act into law. This historic legislation, now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, was a major milestone in the quest to end the chronic exclusion and miseducation of students with exceptional needs. More than any other law to date, this legislation helped open the door to fairness and access for millions of children with disabilities and paved the way to greater educational access. As recent as 40 years ago, most States excluded students with disabilities from public schools. All that began to change in 1971. In PARC v. Pennsylvania, a class-action lawsuit filed in my home State, the U.S. District Court ruled, for the first time, that the State had a legal duty to educate students with intellectual disabilities, and that the U.S. Constitution guarantees of equal protection and due process prevent schools from excluding disabled children solely on the basis of their disabilities. This monumental decision was followed by similar decisions in 27 States and the District of Columbia. During this time and shortly thereafter, Congress amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to include funds for the education of disabled children and created a Bureau of Education for the Handicapped within the U.S. Office of Education. It also boosted funding for States under the Education for the Handicapped Act of 1970 and required States to detail their plans for achieving the goal of full educational opportunities for disabled students. It also passed section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which granted specific protections to disabled students. But it wasn't until 1975, with the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, that States and school districts were required to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities. Under the law, each child must have an Individualized Education Program, or IEP, that details the range of services to be provided and where a student's education is to take place, with a heavy preference for the mainstreaming of disabled children whenever possible. The law also mandates that districts establish procedures for ensuring that parents are involved in the development of each IEP and they have a voice in the district's decisions about the range of services it will provide. In 2004, Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act to reauthorize the law. During this latest renewal, we worked to strengthen the focus on academic achievement through the development of the child's IEP, gave parents more control over the education of their children, fostered better communication between parents and school district officials, and supported high-quality special education teachers. While there is still much work that remains, including meeting the Federal commitment to provide 40 percent of the excess cost of educating students with disabilities, there is no doubt that IDEA has been an important part of ensuring that students with disabilities are able to become full and productive members of society. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 329. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a living legend who has walked on the sidelines of Penn State football games since 1950, Coach Joe Paterno. To many who watch football, his name is iconic. Joe Paterno, or JoePa as he is known by many, is forever linked with rolled up khakis and black shoes and thick, broad-rimmed glasses and traditional plain blue and white uniforms with no names on the back. Since starting at Penn State as an assistant coach in 1950 and becoming head coach in 1966, other college football programs have seen their coaches come and go. In Paterno's tenure at Penn State, Presidents and Congresses have come and gone, dating back to the Dwight Eisenhower administration. In his build-up to 400 wins, Paterno began winning before many coaches on other teams were born. He has turned Penn State football into a powerhouse program, one of only seven football programs in history to have more than 800 wins. But what makes Joe Paterno so different and well respected by his fellow coaches, players and fans is the manner in which he led and built the program. Paterno emphasizes success with honor on and off the field. When asked what the milestone meant to Joe, his wife, Sue Paterno, responded that the milestones were not important to the Penn State coach; but, rather, the most important thing to Joe was, to quote, ``The young men you develop.'' Under Joe Paterno, Penn State has had one of the highest graduation rates in college football. In 2009, the graduation rate was 89 percent, the highest of all football teams in the Associated Press Top 25. Paterno has also had 15 Hall of Fame scholar-athletes, 34 first-team Academic All-Americans with 44 overall, and 18 NCAA Postgraduate Scholarship winners. Joe Paterno has donated millions of his own money back to Penn State University and helped raise hundreds of millions more for need-based scholarships and libraries, one of which is now named the Paterno Library. He is heavily involved in the Special Olympics and is also a national spokesperson for the Charcot-Marie-Tooth Association. So today we honor Joe Paterno on reaching a historic milestone, his 400th win. He now has the most wins of any coach in Division I-A Football Subdivision history. Along the way he passed other legendary coaches such as Bear Bryant and Bobby Bowden, both of whom Joe Paterno called friends. At Penn State there is a saying: ``We are Penn State.'' As an alumnus, I know it well and have heard it echo through Beaver Stadium in State College on game day. But what this one coach has done for one school, one program, thousands of players and coaches and the sport altogether has resonated throughout the country. Joe Paterno is Penn State. Joe Paterno is college football. I urge my colleagues to commend Joe Paterno on this milestone by supporting this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of House Resolution 1655, expressing support for designation of the month of October 2010 as National Farm to School Month. Farm to School programs operate in every State in more than 9,700 schools and support community-based food systems, strengthen family farms, and improve student health. These programs bring fresh fruits and vegetables to students to help ensure they have access to quality food options and get their recommended daily servings of fruits and vegetables. Ultimately, these programs can help in the fight to end childhood obesity. Farm to School also supports local businesses. Schools involved in Farm to School programs serve as consistent customers to food producers and help support local farmers and the community. In fact, for every $1 spent through the Farm to School program, $1 to $3 is returned to the local community. The Farm to School program benefits both students and local businesses, and I urge my colleagues to support designating October as National Farm to School Month. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1652, expressing support for designation of the month of October 2010 as National Principals Month. Anyone who has visited a successful school or who has watched their children progress through their education knows a good principal is vital to a successful school. A good principal sets the tone for the school and encourages teachers and students alike to do their best each day. Principals are also the people who know the school's needs best as they are in the building talking to the teachers and talking to the students on a regular basis. Unfortunately, all too often principals are prevented from doing what they need to do in terms of selecting the best teachers for their school. Earlier this year, committee Republicans developed four key principles on education reform. One of those principles, restoring local control, highlights the importance of ensuring principals have the flexibility they need to help their students and teachers succeed in the classroom. Principals are key to ensuring that every child excels in the classroom. For that reason, I support this resolution and ask my colleagues to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker I have no requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1654, expressing support for the designation of the week of April 11, 2011, as ``Undergraduate Research Week.'' Almost 600 colleges and universities in the United States offer opportunities for undergraduate research. Undergraduate research opportunities encourage students to develop critical thinking skills, problem-solving skills, and may intrigue students to pursue research opportunities in their educational and professional futures. Research at all levels of education encourages innovation and discovery essential to the future of the United States. Undergraduate research in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines can foster a student's interest in these fields, which are vital to the success of our Nation and of the world today. Undergraduate Research Week recognizes the importance of undergraduate research. It encourages colleges and universities, businesses and other organizations to recognize the occasion. I support this resolution, and I ask my colleagues to do the same. I reserve the balance of my time.