Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, the land swap in today's legislation would grant two of the world's largest, foreign-owned mining companies--Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton--mining rights to 760 acres of the Tonto National Forest in Southeastern Arizona in exchange for other land the companies currently own. This exchange is necessary for Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton to gain access to significant copper deposits they believe lie underneath the land in the Tonto National Forest. Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to responsible domestic energy and mineral production--but I am strongly opposed to this majority's complete disregard for our environmental laws and this legislation's failure to ensure American taxpayers get full value for the resources at issue in this proposed transaction. Specifically, H.R. 1904 would exempt this land swap from the requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act--a law specifically designed to evaluate the impacts of proposed actions on our natural resources before public resources are sold to private interests. The value of a thorough NEPA analysis is especially significant in this case, where unanswered questions about the water demands of the proposed mining operation are especially consequential to the surrounding community. Furthermore, as we work to reduce our national debt, I believe taxpayers have a right to fair compensation for resources taken from public lands, something the convoluted appraisal process called for in H.R. 1904 will almost certainly fail to do. Mr. Chair, if this land swap is truly in the interests of the American people, it has nothing to fear from an appropriate environmental review and should be expected to fairly compensate the American taxpayer for the value of the resources taken from their land. I urge a no vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, today we gather to honor the sacrifice and patriotism of the Montford Point Marines with Congress's highest civilian award, the Congressional Gold Medal. The Montford Point Marines were this Nation's first class of African- American Marine recruits. As was often the case during the Jim Crow Era, being the first African-Americans to break the color barriers resulted in a whole new set of hardships. Montford Point Marines suffered from the start. Not only were they not allowed to train at Camp Lejeune with their white colleagues, the Commandant, the Marine's highest ranking officer said publicly that if he had to choose between 250,000 African-American Marines and 5,000 whites, he would rather have the whites. Training along the North Carolina coast, they endured inferior conditions and trained with inferior equipment dodging snakes and malaria-infected mosquitoes in summer and risking exposure from the bitter cold in winter as they passed the nights in huts made of cardboard. Fueled by a fierce determination to answer the call to arms in their Nation's hour of need, the Montford Point Marines endured these hardships and joined the fight in Okinawa, where their courage and bravery were celebrated. When the war ended, they returned home to silence, abuse and indifference and were soon forgotten. That is, until today. As a cosponsor of this bill, I am proud to stand with my colleagues to recognize the Montford Point Marines for their courage and sacrifice with the Congressional Gold Medal.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, my policy regarding trade agreements has always been to consider each agreement on its merits. I have supported some FTAs and I have opposed others based on a careful consideration of the details of the legislation and the pros and cons associated with them. In each case, I apply the following test: Will the agreement help the American economy and American workers? It is by that standard that I measured the trade package we are considering today containing the House passed renewal of the Generalized System of Preferences for poor countries; trade adjustment assistance to support those American workers who may be harmed in specific cases; and the long pending free trade agreements with Panama, Korea and Colombia. After considering each of these agreements, I have decided to support them. For too long, the U.S. automobile industry has had only limited access to Korea's auto market. In 2010, over 500,000 Korean autos were sold in the U.S. while only 14,000 American cars were sold in Korea. The Obama Administration negotiated with the Korean government and corrected that imbalance while increasing American access to other areas of the Korean economy such as its lucrative financial services and IT sectors. The agreement is supported by the United Auto Workers and the American auto industry. The Panama FTA increases the access of American goods and services to Panama's economy while also addressing long-standing concerns about the quality of Panama's workers protections and about its status as a tax- haven for those Americans trying to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Through close negotiation with the Panamanian government, the Obama Administration and Members of Congress have addressed those concerns. The Colombia FTA is also a win for the American economy. The benefits Colombia has enjoyed as a result of its membership among the GSP recipient countries has meant that it has had significant and one-sided access to the American market. This FTA balances that relationship so that now American companies enjoy the same access to Colombia's growing economy that Colombia has enjoyed in the U.S. for decades. Colombia has struggled with a violent past, including the targeted execution of labor organizers. With the accession of the Santos Administration and its commitment to addressing this serious problem, encouraging headway has been made. As an indication of its good faith, the Santos Administration has passed into law 75 percent of the requirements of the ``Action Plan'' it negotiated with the Obama Administration, including the adoption of standards required for approving trade agreements and establishing an ILO office in Bogota to monitor labor violations. Colombia has made significant progress toward penalizing those companies trying to circumvent collective bargaining agreements through the use of `collectives' and it has created a separate Ministry of Labor to give Cabinet-level attention to critical labor issues. Passage of the Colombia FTA will encourage the Colombian government to continue these reforms. Each of these bills increases opportunities for American companies and consumers while helping to spread those economic benefits widely for American workers here and abroad. The American economy cannot afford to sit on the sidelines as other countries form trade partnerships. As we aggressively pursue trade and export opportunities around the globe, steps we take to protect our workers at home, such as TAA, are critical. Together, these trade measures represent the strong commitment of Congress and the Obama Administration to promoting job growth in the U.S. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting these important pieces of legislation.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary achievements of my constituent, Nancy Grace Roman. One of the world's most significant women in the history of science, Dr. Roman has dedicated her life to the exploration of the universe. Often called the ``Mother of Hubble'' thanks to her efforts to make the Hubble Space Telescope a reality, Dr. Roman was critical to establishing the new era of space-based astronomical instrumentation. Recently, she was honored by NASA with a fellowship in her name, the Nancy Grace Roman Technology Fellowship in Astrophysics, which will help young researchers achieve scientific breakthroughs in the development of innovative technologies, just as Dr. Roman did decades ago. Only the fourth person recognized by NASA with a fellowship, she joins the ranks of Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble and Carl Sagan in being so honored. Dr. Roman's fascination with outer space began at a young age. Her passion for the universe was fueled in large part by her parents. Her father, a geophysicist, answered her scientific questions, while her mother, a teacher, exposed Nancy to nature and spent nights observing the sky with her daughter and pointing out such astronomical phenomena as constellations and the aurora. Dr. Roman knew from her early childhood that she wanted to devote her life to astronomy, even organizing an astronomy club to observe the constellations with her friends when she was just eleven years old. Dr. Roman's dream of a life in science came true, as she devoted her career to understanding the nature of stars. Dr. Roman received a B.A. in astronomy from Swarthmore College in 1946 and a doctorate in astronomy from the University of Chicago in 1949. She then began working as a research associate in the radio astronomy branch of the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory. In 1959, NASA recruited Dr. Roman to set up a program in space astronomy. As NASA's first chief of astronomy, Dr. Roman traveled across the United States, seeking to identify the needs of astronomers nationwide. She then established a committee of astronomers and NASA engineers to determine the kinds of satellites that were necessary and that could feasibly be engineered. Dr. Roman once described looking at the universe through the atmosphere as ``somewhat like looking through a piece of old, stained glass.'' Her deep passion and determination for finding newer, more efficient methods of astronomical exploration that would solve this problem inspired her to help facilitate the development of the most powerful and versatile instrument of its time--the Hubble Space Telescope. Her role in the creation of this extraordinary piece of technology led Dr. Roman to be affectionately known as the ``Mother of Hubble.'' Following her work with the Hubble Space Telescope, Dr. Roman served as Chief of NASA's Astronomy and Relativity Programs, the first woman ever to hold an executive position at NASA. There, she was involved with, among other things, planning numerous satellite and rocket exploration programs. In addition to having made numerous professional contributions to science, Dr. Roman is an inspiration to women of all ages and backgrounds. She grew up knowing what she wanted to do with her life but, as a woman of that era, she was forced to deal with a constant stream of disparaging comments from people around her. When Dr. Roman opted to take an additional year of high school mathematics instead of Latin, she was ridiculed by the school guidance counselor, who rejected the prospect of a girl choosing to pursue such a field. Her friends also tried to discourage her from science and mathematics, insisting that it was not the correct path for a woman of her generation to follow. Women of Dr. Roman's generation were often discouraged from pursuing any professional career, much less one in the sciences. Despite this, Dr. Roman followed her passion. She defied generational stereotypes, persevering to become one of the most eminent and influential women of her generation. Today, Dr. Roman remains an active member of the American Association of University Women and the River Road Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Bethesda, Maryland. Since retiring from NASA in 1979, she spends much of her time consulting, teaching, and lecturing around the country and continues to be a passionate advocate for science. Our many astronomical and astrophysical advances would not have been possible without the efforts of Dr. Roman. By establishing a fellowship in Dr. Roman's name, NASA honors her and her achievements, and ensures that her contributions to the scientific community will never be forgotten. I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting Dr. Nancy Grace Roman and in thanking her for all that she has done to advance scientific knowledge and our understanding of our world.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chair, coal-based power plants account for roughly one half of all electricity generation in the United States and produce about 135 million tons of coal combustion waste annually. This enormous waste stream contains toxins like arsenic, lead and mercury that can contaminate drinking water and threaten public health--which is why the EPA is in the process of developing regulations to ensure that it is either responsibly recycled or disposed of properly. Rather than letting EPA complete its work, H.R. 2273 directs each state to create its own coal waste management permitting program, without any legal standard to ensure a minimum level of public safety. Moreover, if a state decides not to enforce the standards it puts in its own permitting program, there is little EPA can do about it. Madam Chair, as the 2008 Kingston disaster demonstrated, coal ash is dangerous, inadequately regulated, and dispersed throughout the country. In order to protect the public health and avoid a regulatory race to the bottom, we as a nation must establish and enforce a minimum federal level of safety and protection for all of our citizens. This regulation takes us in precisely the opposite direction. Accordingly, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 358, the misleadingly titled the ``Protect Life Act''. Let me be clear. The Affordable Care Act already prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or where the woman's life is endangered. We included extensive mechanisms to ensure that no federal subsidies in the health insurance exchanges would go to pay for abortions. The bill on the Floor today takes the unprecedented step of preventing a woman from using her own private funds to purchase a full, comprehensive health care plan through the exchanges established in the Affordable Care Act. That is simply another way of denying a woman the right to choose. I urge House Republicans to stop playing ideological games and to pursue an agenda to help create jobs, strengthen the economy, and move our country forward.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were supported by large bipartisan majorities in both chambers of Congress. Section 112 of that legislation set forth a data-driven process for emissions reductions across more than 100 source categories--an approach that has proven to be an enormous success, reducing carcinogens and other air toxics by 1.7 million tons a year without hindering economic growth. Inexplicably, today's legislation flies in the face of this bipartisan achievement. By attempting to first block and then delay EPA's ability to curtail toxic emissions from large industrial boilers and incinerators, H.R. 2250 effectively rewrites Section 112 of the Clean Air Act to prioritize pollution over public health. If permitted to take effect, the mandated three year delay in this bill would cause an estimated 20,000 premature deaths, 126,000 asthma attacks, 12,000 heart attacks and 960,000 days of missed work due to mercury, lead, arsenic and other toxic exposure. This is just completely unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, public health is not a problem. It's a priority. Outside the far right wing of the Republican party, America's broad bipartisan mainstream supports the Clean Air Act and, as a basic expectation of government, wants us to protect their right to healthy air. We should listen.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, today's Continuing Resolution avoids an unnecessary government shutdown--and it does so in a manner that does not unduly threaten job creation or undermine our economic recovery. Specifically, this CR extends FY 2011 discretionary funding at approximately 98.5 percent for agencies and programs through November 18 of this year. The 1.5 percent cut brings funding in line with the $1.043 Trillion top line called for in the Budget Control Act agreement. Additionally, today's bill supports the postal service, extends the flood insurance program and funds vital disaster relief through November 18. As Ranking Member of the Budget Committee, I would prefer timely completion of our annual appropriations bills. But in the absence of regular order, this relatively clean, bipartisan CR is preferable to the alternative. I urge a yes vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this legislation, which would delay for another five years Clean Air Act standards for cement kilns that are already thirteen years overdue. Like so many other bills the current House Leadership has brought before us, this bill is premised on a fundamentally false choice--that we can't have good jobs unless we are willing to breathe dirty air. I don't believe that. And I don't think most Americans believe that. In fact, the entire forty year history of the Clean Air Act demonstrates conclusively that it just isn't true. The Clean Air Act protections at issue in this legislation will for the first time limit mercury, arsenic, soot, hydrochloric acid and other dangerous emissions from cement kilns. The proposed reductions will prevent as many as 2500 premature deaths and 17,000 asthma attacks annually, and produce $7 to $19 in public health benefits for every $1 spent on cleanup costs. Which is why the protections have the support of reputable public health organizations like the American Lung Association, the American Public Health Association and the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. Rather than undermining our nation's public health, we should be focused on enacting a real jobs agenda to put Americans back to work and accelerate our economic recovery. I urge a no vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 745, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, today's legislation continues the majority's relentless assault on the Clean Air Act and our nation's public health. Let's be clear: clean air is not--and has never been--the enemy of economic growth. If history has taught us anything, it is that a healthy environment and a healthy economy go hand in hand. Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has reduced air pollutants by 60 percent while the economy has grown by over 200 percent, with economic benefits expected to reach $2 trillion by 2010--exceeding costs by more than 30 to 1. Rather than building on this bipartisan record of cost-effective environmental achievement, today's legislation proposes to block two of the most important Clean Air Act rules in decades: the mercury and air toxics rule and the cross-state air pollution rule. The proposed mercury and air toxics standards would prevent more than 90% of the mercury from coal-fired power plants to be emitted into the air by 2015--and it would reduce fine particle emissions by 29 percent. More than half of the nation's coal-fired power plants already deploy the technology necessary to meet these standards, whose adoption will prevent 17,000 premature deaths and 120,000 cases of asthma a year. The long overdue cross-state air pollution rule would require 27 upwind states to reduce their sulfur dioxide emissions by 75 percent and their nitrogen oxide emissions by 54 percent. These reductions will prevent an additional 34,000 premature deaths and 400,000 cases of asthma each year and the ``good neighbor'' principle it represents is especially important to downwind states like my home state of Maryland, which currently must bear the brunt of air pollution that blows in from other states. The economic and public health benefits from both of these rules far outstrip the cost of the pollution control technology necessary to achieve them--a fact the one-sided ``study'' in this legislation is deliberately designed to obscure. And the pollution control technology itself will drive investment and job creation for professionals like engineers, electricians, pipefitters and boilermakers whose expertise and labor will be needed to install it. It's a clear win for our economy and a clear win for our public health. I urge a no vote.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, today's Continuing Resolution would fund federal government operations through November 18, 2011 at 98.5% of FY 2011 funding levels, reflecting the 1.5% across-the-board cut required to bring spending in line with the $1.043 trillion discretionary cap for FY 2012 in the recently enacted Budget Control Act of 2011. Additionally, H.R. 2608 provides $3.65 billion in disaster relief funding, which is $1.8 billion below President Obama's request and $3.25 billion less than the Senate allocation supported by ten Republican Senators. Of the $3.65 billion for disaster relief in today's legislation, $1 billion is made available in FY 2011 and the remaining $2.65 billion is designated as FY 2012 money. However, in a sharp break with precedent under previous administrations from both parties, the $1 billion in FY 2011 in emergency disaster relief is offset by a $1.5 billion cut in the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program. Mr. Speaker, we should not be holding emergency disaster relief hostage to political infighting in Washington, DC. And with unemployment still hovering above 9%, we certainly shouldn't be undermining a proven job creator like the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program that will help next generation vehicles get built in the United States rather than overseas. Instead, we should put politics aside, pass a clean CR and get disaster relief where it is needed without undercutting innovation and job creation in an economy that needs more of both.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2867, a bill to reauthorize the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Around the world, millions of people suffer persecution merely because they practice a different religion than other people around them. No one should be made to feel that the practice of their religion is a crime or a source of shame. Such persecution violates their inalienable human right to practice the religion of their own choosing and promotes political instability. The historical record is replete with incidents of violence and conflicts that have their source in sectarian and religious differences and rivalries. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom is an important advocate for the freedom of religion and helps promote the issue as an integral part of the U.S. foreign policy and national security agendas. Additionally, by providing data analysis and assessment of conditions in affected areas, USCIRF enables the U.S. to impact acts of religious repression and intolerance in countries around the world. USCIRF helps to advance the visibility of religious freedom as a priority of U.S. foreign policy and helps to address the challenges of religious extremism, intolerance, and repression throughout the globe. I support the USCIRF and its mission and I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 2867.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Street Soccer USA--a leader in sports-based youth development for the least- served in our country--on the occasion of its 4th Annual Street Soccer USA Cup that was held here in Washington, D.C. this summer. Street Soccer USA is an effective and innovative organization which builds trust through sports to better leverage existing social services in communities across the U.S., enhancing their outcomes and tying the greater community to the issues of homelessness and poverty in a new way. Building on the basic sports platform, Street Soccer USA creates a positive community around people who are homeless, dramatically transforming their lives. SSUSA uses team sports to deliver job and life skills training and other specialized services, ultimately connecting participants directly to jobs, education, and housing. It has a broad coalition of implementing parties in 18 cities across the United States, including the Foundation for Change in Montgomery County in my district. The program's systemic approach is designed to build trust, self-esteem, discipline, and basic financial literacy. Mentoring and goal setting practices are designed to transform lives and address barriers like drug addiction and mental instability head on. In 2010, SSUSA launched a research initiative with four universities to examine the impact of sport based programming on marginalized populations and looking both at the impact of its 265 day a year programming and its single day events. Since its creation in 2007, SSUSA has a history of success including 410 players placed in jobs and housing through 18 programs across the country. 92 percent of participants show a new motivation for life, and 75 percent pursue further education, address substance abuse issues, reconnect with family, or address mental health issues. This June, members of the Montgomery County program joined over 200 athletes overcoming homelessness from 18 cities across the United States to compete alongside an estimated 500 youth, adult, and corporate team players as part of the nation's premier sport for social change event in D.C. The Cup attracted national media attention and participation from professional athletes, and involved grassroots outreach throughout the Spring and Summer. I am proud that the Montgomery County team took home a second place finish to the Street Soccer Minneapolis team during a hard-fought battle that ended in overtime penalty kicks. Top achievers on and off the field were selected to represent the United States men's and women's teams at the 56 Nation Homeless World Cup in Paris, France in August. Two members of the Montgomery County program, Salvador ``Chamba'' Matos and Alvaro Gonzales, were among the 16 chosen from 8 different cities to represent our country in Paris. Both have returned safely and are now employed, housed, and using their free time to help others who are in the situation where they once found themselves. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating all of this year's participating Street Soccer USA Cup teams and the players chosen for the national teams. They are among a distinguished group of individuals dedicated to improving their lives. I also want to recognize SSUSA's entire staff of employees and volunteers, who work so hard to strengthen their organization and help so many, and extend to them my best wishes for many successful years ahead. They are demonstrating that ending homelessness is a team sport.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so- called ``Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act.'' It's a nice name for a bad bill. This bill is not about protecting American jobs or American workers. It's about protecting big businesses who want to move jobs out of American communities without consequence. It's about forcing American workers to accept the lowest common denominator rather than standing up for fair pay and safer working conditions. For more than 75 years, federal law has guaranteed employees the right to organize without threat of retaliation. If workers decide to form a union, the company can't punish them by moving operations down the street or out of the country. But this bill would allow companies to retaliate with impunity by stripping the National Labor Relations Board of its power to enforce that law. Today's legislation is a response to an ongoing dispute between the NLRB and Boeing. I understand that many of my colleagues have strong opinions on that issue, but it is not the business of this Congress to legislate on an individual case. It is not appropriate to dismantle the enforcement mechanism to secure a result for any party. This bill makes sweeping changes to worker protections and would have severe consequences. Rather than creating a single job, it would give employers free rein to eliminate jobs or move them overseas to punish workers for exercising their rights. Mr. Speaker, this bill strips fundamental protections from American workers, leaving them and their jobs less secure. It turns back the clock on 75 years of employment law. It is the wrong direction for America, and I urge my colleagues to reject it today.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act, which would authorize surface transportation programs through March and the Federal Aviation Administration through January. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the construction sector faced 13.5 percent unemployment in August. The programs we authorize in this bill create the projects to help put this industry back to work-- to rebuild roads and bridges, renovate airports, and expand mass transit options. These are good jobs, here at home, that improve efficiency and economic competitiveness. But this bill is not enough. We cannot continue short-term extensions and stop-gap measures to make these critical investments. States need more certainty to plan their projects and industry needs to know that we are committed to rebuilding our infrastructure so they have the confidence to hire back employees who have been laid off. Additionally, this bill does not include relief for those FAA employees who were furloughed through no fault of their own when Congress failed to extend authorization this summer. It is important to make these workers whole, and we should work quickly to provide retroactive pay. Mr. Speaker, we need an ambitious agenda of investment that will put Americans back to work, repair our crumbling infrastructure, and jumpstart our economy. We need a long-term reauthorization of these critical programs. The American people are waiting--it's time to get the job done.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 1892, The 2012 Intelligence Authorization Act and to congratulate Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Ruppersberger for their close collaboration on the bill and for their willingness to work together to shape a bi-partisan measure. This legislation demonstrates the Intelligence Committee's continued commitment to honoring the sacrifices and dedication of the public servants who comprise the Nation's intelligence community. Sunday marks the 10th anniversary of the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Today this body will consider two pieces of legislation directly relevant to that event. H. Res. 391, which expresses the sense of the House regarding the anniversary of the attacks and H.R. 1892. H.R. 1892, the FY12 Intelligence Authorization Act, authorizes about $80 billion in funding for the 17 agencies that oversee and conduct the nation's intelligence and intelligence-related activities including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the CIA, and the National Security Agency, as well as intelligence activities of the Defense Department, FBI, State Department, Homeland Security Department, and other agencies. The Intelligence Committee has written the bill with enhanced oversight and accountability features to better protect the American taxpayer's investment in national security and to prevent the wasting of resources. In that regard, the bill cuts one billion dollars from the intelligence budget without sacrificing the Nation's security by merging services and finding other savings. The bill is fiscally responsible and preserves national security. I support both H. Res. 391 and H.R. 1892 and encourage my colleagues to do the same. The intelligence apparatus of the country has evolved and improved since the tragic events of September 11th and now collaborates on data collection and analysis in a way that it did not ten years ago. The culture of our intelligence community now has a more open and inclusive attitude across all platforms from the highest levels of government down to the agent in the field. The fruits of that successful collaboration were on bold display on May 1, 2011 when a commando team of Navy Seals brought Osama bin Laden to justice during their secret raid on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Due to the concerted efforts, dedication and hard work of our Nation's clandestine services and the people who support them, the U.S. is safer now than it was in the days leading up the attacks of September 11th. We meet today in advance of Sunday's anniversary to honor and remember the heroes and victims of 9/11. We also gather to express once again our gratitude to the focused, determined and persistent efforts of the men and women who comprise this Nation's intelligence community for all that they do.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we should never have gotten to the point where our troops in Afghanistan had to ask whether they were going to be paid. That's a scandal. And it's scandalous that our Republican colleagues would threaten for the first time in American history to torpedo America's creditworthiness and American jobs unless they succeeded in enacting a budget plan to end the Medicare guarantee, slash Medicaid, and slash critical investments in education and our future. That was the plan. They wanted to do that now, and they wanted to have this whole debate again 6 months from now. Why? Not to reduce the deficit. If the goal was to reduce the deficit, why refuse to end taxpayer subsidies for the oil companies? If reducing the deficit was the purpose, why refuse to end special breaks for corporate jets and the folks at the very high end of the income scale? That wasn't the plan. The plan was to use this moment to threaten the economy, to try and slash the social safety net and those critical investments in education and innovation in our future. And guess what: They failed. They failed to do that. They failed to end the Medicare guarantee. They failed to slash Medicaid. They failed to slash education. In this measure, we succeeded in protecting Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries. We succeeded in protecting seniors in nursing homes, individuals with disabilities and poor kids who depend on Medicaid for their health care. And we succeeded in providing room for critical investments in education and America's future. Don't get me wrong, Mr. Speaker, there's much in this plan I don't like. We did not succeed in shutting down special interest tax loopholes that add hundreds of billions of dollars to our deficits. Our Republican colleagues refused to cut those subsidies for big oil companies. They refused to cut the others. And now we're going to have a great debate. We're going to have a great debate about how to grow the economy and reduce our long-term deficit. It will be a debate about our national priorities. I hope we will support the balanced approach that the President has called for, one that refuses to put greater burdens on Medicare beneficiaries in order to provide greater tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. In the coming months, our Republican colleagues will be given the following test: Will they choose to protect special interest tax breaks over investments necessary to keep our Nation strong and secure? Will they finally demonstrate a willingness to pay for our national defense rather than put it on the credit card? Mr. Speaker, let's get on with that big national debate, and let's finally focus on jobs and getting the economy going as we reduce our long-term deficit. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Wisconsin, a member of the Budget Committee, Ms. Moore.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, as I said at the outset, we should never have reached this point in our country. We should never have reached the point when our troops wondered whether they were going to get paid or individuals on Social Security wondered whether they were going to see their earned benefits. That should never have happened. This is the first time in history, the first time in history, that we've seen Members of this Congress threaten to close down the American economy unless they got their particular budget plan through, one that ends the Medicare guarantee, slashes Medicaid and would deeply cut our investments in education and innovation. We protected those investments in this bill. The plan did not work. It didn't work now, and the plan to do it again 6 months from now didn't work. So now we will have that great debate over our priorities. We are looking forward to it. Let's get on to talking about jobs and the economy. With that, I yield 1 minute to the very distinguished Democratic leader, who has been a fighter for America's priorities, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey, who's been a fighter in this battle, Mr. Andrews. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Just to be very clear, what we did was eliminate the overpayments to some of the Medicare Advantage plans. Listen, we used much of those savings to close the prescription drug doughnut hole. In your budget, you took the whole $500 billion, but you reopened the prescription drug doughnut hole at the same time you were eliminating the Medicare guarantee. That's the difference.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank the chairman for yielding. If you look at the Boehner proposal, it says we've got to cut $1.8 trillion. The Speaker of the House has already said that you can't have any revenue as part of that, that you can't close one corporate loophole. In fact, he said that the majority would override any proposal, so the only other way to get it mathematically is to start slashing Medicare and to start going after Social Security.