Peter Visclosky

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I think I have made my point. I think the gentleman has, and I think this is the wrong policy. Again, institutionally we need to come to grips with natural disasters, set those moneys aside; but in the alternative and in the intermediate term, we need to recognize them for what they are and not rob the future of this Nation economically to do so.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. The gentleman is correct. But I would broaden that to suggest the United States of America is getting that money, and people who want to make things in the United States of America and manufacture things in the United States of America are getting that money.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Right. We have 10 pending, and I would not be on the floor if I did not believe we've maintained and created jobs and we have potentially 10,000 more jobs than we can create with the $1.5 billion that is pending; and I would point out, again, I would broaden your observation to the entire United States of America. I mentioned two problems we face. The second is manufacturing in the United States of America. In 1977, we had over 18 million Americans engaged in manufacturing. Last year, we had over 11 million. The real hourly wage for what an American worker is paid for 1 hour's worth of their physical labor, whatever they may do in this country, is 53 cents less in 2010 than it was in 1977. That's not the country I want to leave the children of this world, and I'm convinced it's because of the loss of those manufacturing jobs. If it's good enough to declare an emergency and build a children's hospital in Basra, Iraq, we ought not to take money out of an investment account that creates jobs in the auto industry to help people in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. If it is good enough to declare an emergency to have generators installed in Kandahar, Afghanistan, by the Army Corps of Engineers, we ought not to take money away from job-creating programs to help people in Springfield, Massachusetts. If it's good enough to build a hydroelectric dam in Afghanistan on an emergency basis, we ought to declare an emergency to help people in Smithville, Mississippi.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and I rise to oppose the taking of the $1.5 billion from the advanced technology vehicle manufacturing account to offset a portion of the Army Corps disaster needs estimated to be $2.256 billion instead of declaring this matter an emergency. I do think as a matter of policy this institution and the Congress as a whole needs to have the intestinal fortitude to understand that we have natural disasters every year, and we need to set aside moneys to fund those and not to take money out of investment accounts that create jobs in the United States of America. We have two problems that we're discussing today. One is a natural problem. We have had tornadoes, we have had floods, we have had hurricanes, we had an earthquake, and we have had wildfires. So what is new? The fact is in every year save two since 1997, the Congress has recognized the need for emergency funds to respond to the impacts of natural disasters on our Nation's water resources infrastructure. Since 2001, the Congress has provided more than $24 billion in emergency funds to the Army Corps of Engineers for this very purpose. And according to the Corps of Engineers, we have spent $5.12 billion on an emergency basis in Afghanistan and Iraq on economic infrastructures. Now, some suggest all of this has to be offset because we have a fiscal crisis. I would point out that those emergency declarations for water emergencies in 1998 occurred and the budget of the United States was balanced. There was an emergency declaration as far as those water projects in 1999, and we had a balanced budget. There was not an emergency declaration in 2000, and we balanced a budget. In 2001 we had an emergency declaration for water disasters, and we balanced the budget. That's not an argument not to meet the human crisis that people are facing in this country. I certainly think that my colleague from Washington covered the account as far as vehicle manufacturing very well and the investment it represents and the jobs maintained and created that are represented again in this account. And certainly Chairman Rogers makes a point, and rightfully so, that many of these dollars have now been allocated to specific loan programs and others, eight specifically, will be resolved by the end of this year. Again, this offset would not impact those, and the chairman is absolutely correct. However, I do point out to my colleagues that the remaining 10 projects are in the stage of due diligence, the same words that my colleague from Washington used, to compete for the remainder of the $1.5 billion with approximately 10,000 jobs at stake.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, on September 13, 2011, I was absent from the House and missed rollcall votes 702 and 703. Had I been present for rollcall 702, on agreeing to the amendment, Holt of New Jersey Amendment No. 7 to H.R. 2218, the Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act, I would have voted ``Aye.'' Had I been present for rollcall 703, on agreeing to the amendment, King of Iowa Amendment No. 8 to H.R. 2218, the Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor and enthusiasm that I congratulate Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church as its congregation joins together in celebration of its 100th Anniversary. The congregation, along with Parish Priest, Reverend Aleksandar Savic, and Parish President, Mr. Svetko Balach, will be celebrating this momentous milestone with a celebratory reception on Sunday, October 2, 2011, at the Center for Visual and Performing Arts in Munster, Indiana. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church of East Chicago, Indiana was established on October 30, 1911, when a small group of immigrants from Serbia joined together with the goal of preserving Serbian culture and religious tradition. That same year, they obtained the services of a full time priest, elected their first executive board, and began construction of their church. The church dedication ceremony took place on Saint George's Day, May 6, 1912. Many of the Serbian families sacrificed and gave of their time to assist in building this tremendous place of worship. The church continued to grow and in the 1920s a small hall and the parish house were built on the church property. In 1949, construction began on a new banquet hall/social center which was completed a year later. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church became the second Serbian church in Indiana following the church built in South Bend; and is the fourth oldest original Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States in which services continue to be held. During its existence, Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church Parish experienced many changes as its membership grew. These changes were not only physical changes within the parish itself but also a religious schism within the Serbian Orthodox Church that affected its followers. In 1963, a decision from Belgrade regarding the church structure resulted in years of turmoil that divided Serbian Americans and the Serbian Orthodox Church into two groups. Some members of the church in East Chicago left and went on to build a new church in Northwest Indiana. In 1992, the church reunified and what remained from the division were many churches throughout the area spreading Serbian Orthodoxy. Today the Serbian Orthodox Church remains one of the greatest assets for East Chicago. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church continues to touch the lives of countless individuals through its compassionate service, especially to those in need. Over the years, the church has come to the aid of Serbian immigrants by providing food, shelter and assistance in finding employment. The church auxiliary group, Circle of Serbian Sisters, along with three other Serbian parishes in Northwest Indiana holds an annual fundraiser called Mothers Against Hunger. This event raises tens of thousands of dollars for Serbian orphans in the former Yugoslavia. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in honoring and congratulating the Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church of East Chicago, Indiana on its 100th Anniversary. Throughout many hardships and trials, the members of Saint George have dedicated themselves to preserving Serbian heritage, tradition, and spiritual beliefs. For their commitment to serving so many in need, the church leaders and congregation are to be admired and are worthy of the highest praise.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, on September 7, 2011, I was absent from the House and missed rollcall vote 692. Had I been present for rollcall 692, on a motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Con. Res. 67, authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the District of Columbia Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor and enthusiasm that I congratulate Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church in Schererville, Indiana as its congregation joins together in celebration of its 100th Anniversary. The congregation, along with Parish Priest, Very Reverend Dobrivoje, and Parish President, Mr. Ray Vukas, will be celebrating this momentous milestone with a celebratory reception on Sunday, October 23, 2011, at the Halls of Saint George in Schererville, Indiana. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church in Schererville is a sister church of Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church in East Chicago, Indiana. The parish was established on October 30, 1911, when a small group of immigrants from Serbia joined together with the goal of preserving Serbian culture and religious tradition. That same year, they obtained the services of a full-time priest and elected their first executive board. The dedication ceremony took place on Saint George's Day, May 6, 1912. Many of the Serbian families sacrificed and gave of their time to assist in building this tremendous place of worship. The church continued to grow, and in the 1920's, a small hall and the parish house were built on the church property. In 1949, construction began on a new banquet hall/social center which was completed a year later. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church became the second Serbian Church in Indiana following the church built in South Bend. During its existence, Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church experienced many changes as its membership grew. These changes were not only physical changes to the church itself but also a religious schism within the Serbian Orthodox church that affected its followers. In 1963, a decision from Belgrade regarding the church structure resulted in years of turmoil that divided Serbian Americans and the Serbian Orthodox Church into two groups. By 1970, some of the parishioners who chose to remain under the mother church in Belgrade, Serbia purchased property in Schererville, Indiana for a new church to be built. Within one year, a hall was completed, and by 1980, the new church and parish home were finished. In 1992, the church reunified and what remained from the division were many churches throughout the area spreading Serbian Orthodoxy. The church in Schererville continued to grow, building a hall, a new church, a parish home and a new banquet hall in Schererville. Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church continues to touch the lives of countless individuals through its compassionate service, especially to those in need. Over the years, the church has come to the aid of Serbian immigrants by providing food, shelter and assistance in finding employment. The church auxiliary group, Circle of Serbian Sisters, along with three other Circles of Serbian Sisters in Northwest Indiana, hold an annual fundraiser called Mothers Against Hunger. This event raises tens of thousands of dollars for Serbian orphans in the former Yugoslavia. The St. George parish also supports donations to other charitable organizations such as the Carmelite Home in East Chicago. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in honoring and congratulating the Saint George Serbian Orthodox Church in Schererville, Indiana on its 100th Anniversary. Throughout many hardships and trials, the members of Saint George have dedicated themselves to preserving Serbian heritage, tradition, and spiritual beliefs. For their commitment to serving so many in need, the church leaders and congregation are to be admired and are worthy of the highest praise.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure and admiration that I congratulate the congregation of the Sacred Heart Parish in East Chicago, Indiana, as they celebrate the 85th anniversary of the founding of the parish, as well as the 70th anniversary of the dedication of the church. On Sunday, August 28, 2011, a special Holy Mass, officiated by Bishop Dale Melczek, will take place at Sacred Heart, which will be followed by a celebratory luncheon. Sacred Heart was originally known as Mission of Assumption Slovak Parish. It was founded in order to meet the spiritual needs of Catholic Slovaks in East Chicago, Indiana. From 1926 to 1941, the church held Mass, Confession, and other services at various churches in East Chicago. Father Clement Mlinarovich began to see a great need to build the church in East Chicago, and in May 1941, Bishop John Francis Noll dedicated the beautiful church building and new home of Sacred Heart Parish. The congregation was overjoyed to have a tremendous place of worship and prayer. In addition, parishioners took great pride in the new building because so many of them assisted in its construction. Father Andrew G. Grutka was the first resident pastor at the newly completed church, a position he held from 1942 to 1944, and later became the first Bishop of the Diocese of Gary. Following Father Grutka, Father Louis Duray and Father Milan Bach made significant improvements to the church, which included updating the sanctuary and purchasing the priest's home. My good friend and fellow Slovak, Monsignor Joseph Semancik, has served the people of Sacred Heart Parish since 1960. Over the years, the parish has grown to include members from many different ethnicities. During his tenure, Monsignor Semancik served as the Director of Catholic Charities for the Diocese of Gary. Monsignor Semancik's devoted life of charitable good works is truly inspirational. For his struggle to ensure economic justice for all, and for passionately serving those in need, he is to be respected and admired. This August celebration is tinged with sadness because the parish will be closing in October. Monsignor Semancik will be retiring as the priest of the parish and the congregation will be dispersing to neighboring parishes. The past 85 years have been times of grace for the members and friends of Sacred Heart Parish, which they have shared with the community of East Chicago. Although the parish will be closing, the spirit and prayers of its members will be remembered for years to come. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in honoring and congratulating Sacred Heart Parish. Throughout the years, Sacred Heart has built their congregation and expanded their mission, not only by serving the dedicated, loyal parishioners, but also by touching the lives of countless members of the surrounding community. For their outstanding commitment to serving so many in need, the church leaders and parish members are to be highly commended. May God continue to bless the parish members and its leaders upon the closing of the church and as they move on to the next part of their spiritual lives.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and enthusiasm that I rise today to honor the Holy Trinity Hungarian Church in East Chicago, Indiana, as the parish celebrates its 105th anniversary. On Saturday, September 24, 2011, a celebrated Mass will take place at Holy Trinity, which will be followed by a celebratory banquet to recognize this extraordinary occasion. Around the turn of the 20th century, the Hungarian community in East Chicago, Indiana, with its deep religious traditions, embarked on a venture to start a church of its own. With this goal in mind, on July 4, 1904, a group of community members met in the home of Stephen Farkas on Alexander Avenue to discuss ideas for what would later become the Holy Trinity Hungarian Church. The cornerstone was laid for the first church building on November 11, 1906, followed by its dedication on the Feast of the Holy Trinity in 1907. The parish's first resident pastor, Father Oscar Szilagyi, arrived on Christmas Eve in 1907. Although regulations of the Religious Order prevented Father Szilagyi from remaining at the church for a longer period of time, he has the distinction of performing Holy Trinity's first marriage, baptism, and funeral. Sadly, this building, as well as a second church, were lost to fires, but through the faith, hard work, and dedication of its leaders and congregation, the present church was constructed and was dedicated on May 22, 1921. After the church was rebuilt, the parish continued to grow. In 1922, Holy Trinity opened the doors to a new school, providing a much needed service for young people in the community. By 1927, several organizations had also formed, including: the Holy Rosary Circle, Altar Society, Holy Name Society, Knights of Holy Trinity, Children of Mary, and Young Ladies Sodality. Although Holy Trinity has faced its share of struggles, the collective faith of the clergy and parishioners, and their commitment to the church, has allowed the parish to reach many milestones during its 105-year history. In February of 1957, the Diocese of Gary was established, and Holy Trinity joined other area Catholic parishes in welcoming its first bishop, the Most Reverend Andrew G. Grutka. On July 10, 2004, Holy Trinity experienced the most prestigious event in its history when the church was honored with a visit from Peter Cardinal Erdo, Primate of Hungary. Another extraordinary event took place on May 1, 2005, when the present pastor, Father Alphonse Skerl, celebrated his 50th anniversary of ordination to the priesthood. For the past forty years, Father Skerl has served the parishioners of Holy Trinity. Under the leadership of Father Skerl, and because of the dedication of the parish members, 2011 has been a year of two more historic milestones, the 90th anniversary of the present church and the 105th anniversary of the parish. Mr. Speaker, Holy Trinity Hungarian Church offers an invaluable service to its parishioners and community, providing numerous opportunities for all to join together to experience its rich heritage. I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in congratulating the clergy and congregation Holy Trinity Hungarian Church as they celebrate their 105th Anniversary. Throughout the years, these fine individuals have provided spiritual guidance to their community while honoring and preserving their faith and the traditions of the Hungarian people. Their devotion is worthy of our deepest admiration, and I am proud to serve as their Representative in Washington, DC.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great respect that I stand before you today to congratulate Mr. Michael J. Sullivan on his retirement from his position as General President of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, SMWIA. For 46 years, Mike has devoted his life to serving, protecting, and improving the lives of all Americans who want to earn a living wage for their labor. This is particularly true for the members of the Sheet Metal Workers. Michael Sullivan will be honored for his many years of dedicated service at a retirement celebration on September 20, 2011, at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland. Michael Sullivan's leadership over the years has been indispensable for the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association. During his tenure, Mike has held numerous positions. I'm proud that his career began in my home state, in Indianapolis, Indiana, where he completed his apprenticeship. In 1973, Mike was elected business representative. He later became the business manager and financial secretary of Sheet Metal Workers' Local Union 20. While residing in Indiana, he served as president of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) for the state of Indiana. Later, he was appointed by the Governor to serve as a member for the Indiana Workers' Compensation Commission and Hoosier Alliance Against Drugs. Mike was vice president of the SMWIA General Executive Council for 10 years and then served as the General Secretary-Treasurer of the SMWIA. In 1999, Michael became President of the SMWIA, a position that includes supervising and directing 157 Sheet Metal Workers' Local Unions throughout the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. This vital group provides skilled services to various industries including sheet metal, air conditioning, kitchen equipment, transportation and other metal related manufacturing. Mike has also served as the vice president of the AFL-CIO Executive Council, while also participating in several AFL-CIO executive committees. In addition to the prestigious positions held by Mike, he has served as the labor co-chairman of the Democratic Governors' Association and also currently serves as president of the Eugene Debs Foundation. Mr. Speaker, Mike Sullivan represents the very best values of his home state of Indiana: hard work, perseverance in the face of setbacks, and a selfless nature of wanting to serve others before being served. He is a gentleman in the truest sense of the word: strong, decisive, but governed by compassion and kindness. Michael's dedication to his fellow members throughout his outstanding career is exceeded only by his devotion to his amazing family. Mike and his lovely wife, Amy, are happily married and enjoy spending time with their family, especially their beloved nieces and nephews and friends. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in commending Mr. Michael Sullivan as he is honored for his lifetime of service to the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, its membership, and communities across the nation. Michael Sullivan is worthy of the highest praise for the tremendous contributions he has made to all of us. As my 95-year-old father, John Visclosky, would say, ``He's a 100 percent guy.''

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to S. 365, the Budget Control Act of 2011. It defers decisions we should make today until tomorrow. It is abjectly inadequate. It eliminates dollars from our economic infrastructure at a time when our economy is again faltering. It provides continued funding for two wars leaving the defense industrial complex untouched. It is unjust to the next generation by not taking action now to ensure the long term continued solvency of Social Security and Medicare. When President Bill Clinton left office in January 2001, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that we would pay off our national debt by Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 and that by 2011, the Federal Government would have a $2.3 trillion surplus. Today, we have a projected FY 2011 deficit of nearly $1.5 trillion and a massive $14.3 trillion national debt. Something happened and our nation has not faced a national debt of this magnitude since 1950. Unmistakably, the economic recession played a role in leading us to our current predicament but I want to emphasize that this unprecedented and vast expansion in our debt has largely been the result of a series of decisions made by this body. A study conducted by the Pew Charitable Trusts, an independent, non-profit organization, concluded that new legislation enacted since January 2001 has been responsible for over two-thirds of the growth in our debt. The majority of the contributing legislation was enacted by President Bush, including his tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 and the war in Iraq, measures which I vehemently opposed. As many are well aware, our debt has now grown so large that we must raise the current $14.3 trillion debt limit by tomorrow, in order to avoid defaulting on our loans. Failure to do so would be irresponsible, calling into question the full faith and credit of the United States government unduly harming every American. Should the limit not be raised, the government would have to stop, limit, or delay payments on a broad range of legal obligations, including Social Security and Medicare benefits, military salaries, interest on the national debt, and many other commitments. Further, financial firms estimate that default could cause interest rates on Treasury bonds to rise .006-.01% causing the cost of owning a home, filling a gas tank, sending children to college and buying a car to become even more expensive, squeezing already tight family budgets. The need to address this crisis also brings with it an opportunity to make serious, long-lasting policy changes, providing a comprehensive solution that will put our country on the road to a strong, fiscally- sustainable economic future. However, there is no simple or painless solution to our current predicament. For example, if we eliminated the entire federal government this fiscal year--no federal courts or prisons, no border security, no care for veterans, no White House, no Congress, nothing--and only kept the Department of Defense, entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the national debt, and did not touch taxes, our deficit for FY 2011 would still be $817 billion. We must make substantive and balanced decisions taking our cue from recent history. When our budget was balanced in 1969 and for four years from 1998 to 2001, tax revenues and federal spending represented around 20 percent of our gross domestic product (GDP), the overall size of the economy. Today, revenues are around 14.8 percent and spending is nearly 24.7 of GDP. These two extremes cannot continue if we are to balance the budget and provide for a sound economy for future generations. That is why any serious proposal to reduce the deficit must be comprehensive, and address all spending programs, including domestic discretionary spending, defense spending, as well as entitlement spending, such as Social Security and Medicare, and the other half of the equation, taxes and the inequalities in the tax code. We have already begun to take steps to reduce domestic discretionary spending. For example, as Ranking Member of the Energy and Water Subcommittee, I worked long and hard with my Chairman, Rodney Frelinghuysen, to reduce spending in the FY 2012 Energy and Water Appropriations Act by $2.826 billion below the FY 2010 funding level. Our subcommittee looked at each program and made a myriad of decisions, some to increase spending and some to reduce it, given the purpose and value of each program. Previously, I supported the Department of Defense and Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011, which reduced spending by $38 billion below the previous year's budget. Our fiscal crisis, however, cannot be solved by only addressing the discretionary spending. We must also make thoughtful decisions about our entitlement programs, such as Social Security and Medicare, not only to rein in their growth but also to preserve their solvency for future generations. There are many options that would extend the long term solvency of the Social Security program past 2036, its current estimated solvency date. For example, raising the so-called ``tax cap'' on employees would extend the solvency of the program past 2057. For 2011, Social Security taxable earnings are limited to $106,800. I do not believe that the Social Security tax rate should be raised. However, as a wage tax, I believe the Social Security tax should be paid on all wages. This would create a more equitable system without changing any benefits. If the tax is good enough for every dollar earned by someone waiting tables at a local diner or working in the mill then it is good enough for every dollar earned by someone working on Wall Street. Similar changes can be made to Medicare to ensure its long-term solvency and its existence for future generations. For example, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is prohibited by law from negotiating drug prices on behalf of Medicare Part D beneficiaries. I believe that this law should be repealed, as it would save the federal government an estimated $156 billion over ten years and lower drug costs for seniors. Which brings me to the most contentious side of the equation, taxes. Let me first remind my colleagues that currently, tax revenues are around 14.8 percent of GDP, the lowest it has been since 1950. But what makes our current tax code so abhorrent is not the fact that it is unsustainable, but the fact that it is disparately unequal. For example, from 2008 to 2010, 12 corporations, including Wells Fargo and General Electric, made a combined $171 billion in profits, but paid no federal corporate tax as a result of a convoluted tax code, while my constituents were paying their income taxes. Further, last year the top 25 hedge fund managers alone had combined incomes of $22 billion yet they paid a lower tax rate than a fire fighter from Crown Point, Indiana. Where is the outrage that over a tax code that allows Wall Street to pay a lower tax rate than a person risking his or her life for our safety? At a time when our country faces its biggest financial crisis in decades, it is reprehensible that our tax code allows companies, including some of the most profitable in the nation, are able to exploit loopholes and credits in the tax code to eliminate their tax liabilities. Currently, the U.S. tax code contains over 200 tax loopholes or credits amounting to approximately $1.2 trillion in forgone revenue each year. These loopholes have the same effect on the federal budget as spending programs without being subject to the same public debate and annual evaluation as part of the appropriations process. If we are to address our growing national debt, this spending through the tax code must be reined in. All Americans and American companies should make a contribution to our shared society. We owe it to the next generation to solve this crisis, and swiftly. As our nation remains consumed by the ongoing deficit discussion, this body continues to avoid taking action on its most basic duties. For example, funding for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) expired in 2007. Since then, this body has temporarily extended the Administration's authorization 20 times. Earlier this year, both the House and the Senate finally passed separate FAA reauthorization legislation. Over 100 days have passed and we have yet to take action to resolve differences between the two versions and last week, funding for the FAA expired, causing 4,000 employees to be sent home without pay, 219 construction projects to be halted and $200 million to be lost in tax revenue. I fear that this measure, which even if enacted today will mandate votes down the road and prolong our single-minded focus on the debt ceiling. I urge my colleagues to work together to compromise budget options so that we can continue the work we were sent here to do. The key to confronting our fiscal challenge must be balancing cuts in spending and raising revenue while making the necessary investments in our nation's infrastructure and future. The road to fiscal solvency will be difficult, and tough decisions will need to be made. These decisions are not made in this bill and I am opposed to it.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Again, I thank the staff very much. I yield back the balance of my time. Announcement by the Chair

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I am happy to now yield to the full committee chair, the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very reluctant reservation to the gentleman's amendment. I do not, speaking for myself as an individual, trust the Chinese Government. Representing the largest fuel-producing district in the United States of America, I have simply seen them eat our economic lunch. We have had innumerable hearings in this Congress under varied administrations of both political parties, telling us that dialogue with China is going to work and that somehow it is going to lead to miraculous job creation in the United States of America versus the country of China. I join with the gentleman in urging all of my Members later this morning to vote against Mr. Harris' amendment and that we have no disagreement. And I join with the gentleman of California's concern about how the Department of Energy is going to implement this program with the Chinese because we are told by the Department that this program is going to help U.S. cities develop more cleanly, and it's going to provide market opportunities for U.S. clean-tech companies. We are told further that for wind and solar there will be, in the future, market opportunities. For just one time I would appreciate the Department of Energy showing me the jobs, the companies, the cities towns, the industries where this type of cooperation with China has led to a job, a job in the United States of America. So it is with the greatest reluctance I hesitate to support the gentleman's amendment, agreeing with everything he has said.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. The logical question to my colleagues is, well, Pete, why are you even standing up and talking about this if you agree with everything the gentleman said? I basically do. My concern right now is if we do terminate partnership in the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation, which is based at the International Energy Agency, we have 14 other member nations. And I am just concerned about taking this particular unilateral action, but that is about the only concern I have with the remarks of the gentleman. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. I realize we are at the end of the amendment process. I do not want to take Members' time unduly. I simply want to make a couple of observations in closing on the debate. I, again, want to thank Chairman Frelinghuysen, as well as the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Rogers, and Mr. Dicks, the ranking member here, for their tireless work. As I said at the beginning, Mr. Frelinghuysen has been a leader on the Subcommittee on Energy and Water, and he has also been a tremendous partner. This process has been transparent, it has been open, and it has been thoughtful. As people who have followed the last 5 days understand, we have not agreed on every issue, but we have worked very closely together. I truly personally appreciate that, and as a public official and Member of this body, I appreciate that. Also, again, because we all know, as members of the committee, who does the work to make this such an exceptional bill, I again want to personally thank the staff: Rob Blair, Joe Levin, Loraine Heckenberg, Angie Giancarlo, Perry Yates, Taunja Berquam, Nancy Fox, Katie Hazlett, and Joe DeVooght. Everyone has their expertise. We may have separate offices, but we have, I think, collectively worked very well together and fashioned a wonderful bill.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment. I appreciate his raising the issue and his offering the amendment, and I certainly strongly support his intention here. I would be happy to yield to my chairman.