Tim Walberg

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. And for those nations that love America and appreciate America, we're not standing in a strengthened position that we can afford to them the assurance that America will be there when necessary because we can take care of ourselves, we're independent. And I think those are issues you bring up. I'm delighted that we have the Dean of the Michigan delegation here, Congressman Fred Upton, who has been here through a lot and I'm sure has taken a lot of grief on this issue. And Congressman Upton, before I turn to you, let me just, for the record, state, as you and some of my longer serving Republican colleagues are chastised for not getting this done in the House, you have attempted to get it done on numerous occasions. If we look back at the last decade, by the numbers, votes on ANWR exploration: House Republicans, 91 percent support it; House Democrats, 86 percent opposed. Coal-to-liquid: House Republicans, 97 percent support it; House Democrats, 78 percent opposed. Oil shale exploration: House Republicans, 90 percent supported every vote on that in the House; House Democrats, 86 percent opposed. Moving to the Outer Continental Shelf exploration, where right now foreign countries like Japan, China and Mexico are within 44-50 miles of our shores, and they are drilling and taking out natural gas and oil. On these votes, House Republicans, 81 percent support it; House Democrats, 83 percent opposed. And then finally, refinery increased capacity, and now that we're offering the ``no-more-excuses'' Energy Act, the opportunity to put them on abandoned military facilities, government lands, House Republicans, 97 percent support it; House Democrats, 96 percent opposed. Who is willing to take action? Who has evidenced that by their votes in this great body, this House of Representatives? Republicans, 91 percent, when you put it all together, of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas while 86 percent of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas. And so why do we see an ``energy-less'' energy bill that you talked about that gives incentives for bicycle riding and not energy? I think we have to say it's a leadership problem. So I thank you for bringing up those points. Congressman Upton, from my home State of Michigan, I want to turn it over to you as well for a little perspective.

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And just to make sure that my constituents know that I have not changed States, it's Michigan. It starts with an ``M,'' it's up north, it's cold, generally. I can understand that. But I'm sure proud to represent Michigan, and more importantly, the Seventh District of Michigan in this great House of Representatives. Tonight I am committed to talking about an issue that is of extreme importance to my constituents, and in fact from what we read, constituents of all of our districts all over this great United States because we are in a time and place and setting right now that, frankly, we aren't used to. And may I submit tonight to all who would listen that, frankly, I don't think we should ever get used to it for America is too great of a Nation and has been the ambassador of great blessing to the rest of the world in many cases. It has set the course, has charted the way toward greater economic achievement, standard of living, advances in technology, business, industry, education, medicine, and transportation. I happen to come from the district where Henry Ford had his home, made homes and schools for his employees in a great part of my district, used the resources from that district, including during some wartimes some Sassafras trees just three miles from my house that were used to make a light but strong frame for his motor cars with the absence of steel at that point in time because of the war effort. I come from the State that has been known as the Motor Capital of the World, Michigan. Detroit has set the standard that the rest of the world has followed, emulated, copied, and sometimes even expanded upon, and yet still America, Michigan, the Motor Capital, charts the way. Just the other day--I tell this story for a purpose, but just the other day I had something of an experience happen to me that has never happened before, nor did I expect it to happen. I filled the tank of my Harley Davidson motorcycle, which has a 5-gallon tank, and it cost me over $20. Now, for those of you that have ridden motorcycles, it is almost unbelievable to think that a vehicle that gets great gas mileage, that has a small tank like that would ever cost double digits, let alone over $20 to fill. But that's the place we're in right now with gas today on average across the United States at $4.04 a gallon. My Harley happens to take premium. So I paid $4.27 a gallon for that 5- gallon tank fill. Less than 2 years ago, very seldom, if ever, would I double-digit fill my tank, even if it were on empty. Now, I don't ride my Harley Davidson for transportation anymore. It's primarily for recreation, but 38 years ago when I started riding my first motorcycle it was for transportation, to get to and from my work. Over the course of successive years, I would use my motorcycle in the better seasons of the year, the warmer time, to ride to work and enjoy that experience but also as commuting. I don't do that anymore, but we're paying gas prices now that should not be part and parcel of what America is. We talk a lot about energy independence and being willing to compete and make sure that the rest of the world has to compete with us, as opposed to the other way around. And yet, up to this very day, in the outcome of what has gone on in Congress, it has been just talk and no action. Last week, I heard the governor of our great State of Michigan announce on a major radio talk show that she was now riding a bicycle to the Capitol from her governor's residence each day, and when the host expressed concern about her safety, she said, oh, no problem, my security detail are following me on their bicycles as well. Now, that's a nice story. I don't give any negatives toward our governor for being efficient in her use of energy resources, but you've got to understand that, when I heard that, it shocked me. And in fact, if not angered, it frustrated me to think that the governor of the motor capital of the world was riding a bicycle to work, even though she has an energy efficient, flex-fuel vehicle that I've seen her use and seen her actually fill the gas tank with fuel. Right now, more importantly, getting to the real world of real people, people who pay those gas prices each day, people who pay their taxes, that includes supporting this Congress in what we do, right now most Michigan families that I know of, as I go back to my district each weekend, are giving up things like nights out eating at restaurants or family vacations or traveling to family events in order to cover the rising cost of gasoline. If Congress does not take action soon, families will be giving up much more than that. They will be giving up very specific needs, necessities in their life. And in fact, what I've heard in many town hall meetings, some are already giving up even necessities of their life in order to pay for the gasoline to get to their workplace the next day in order to sometime hopefully pay for some of these necessities. Just this past weekend, AAA announced that the nationwide average gas price finally reached over $4 per gallon. It's been much higher in Michigan for several weeks. High gas prices are affecting families, truckers, farmers, small business owners. I met a small business owner in my office today who said the cost of transporting copy machines, office equipment to and from her client is getting almost prohibitive. Emergency services, public safety, and numerous other entities in Michigan's Seventh District and all over this U.S. are being negatively affected by the high cost, and I say the unnecessarily high cost, of fuel. Despite fuel costs at levels previously only seen in Europe, leadership in this Congress refuses to increase American energy production. Instead, Speaker Pelosi and leading House Democrats would rather increase taxes on domestic energy production and increase our reliance on OPEC or, as suggested last week, sue OPEC for what all that's worth. On a related note, the United States Department of Commerce recently announced the U.S. trade deficit reached its highest level in 13 months in April. Our trade deficit also increased by $4.1 billion between February 2007 and February 2008. This is why our country is facing a rising trade deficit, even though American-made exports grew by 12 percent in 2007. The issue related to energy and the cost of energy has a direct influence on this. This is why we need to provide incentives to increase America's investment in alternative energy and overall production of energy. The United States imports around 12 million barrels of oil a day, and a barrel of oil has gone from $70 to $140 over the last year, dramatically increasing our trade deficit. Our reliance on imported oil and increased oil prices means we are sending even more money to foreign countries and some that don't like us very much at all and certainly don't share our interests. For both economic and national security purposes, and again, I want to reiterate that, national security purposes, Congress needs to finally get serious about an energy plan that truly lowers prices at the pump, reduces our dependence on foreign oil, and makes real progress towards energy independence. Instead of increasing our dependence on OPEC, America needs to return energy production to the United States. Doing so will create American jobs and provide needed economic stability and transportation that's efficient and usable to our American taxpayer. The answer to our current energy crisis must be multi-pronged, and I have cosponsored legislation to provide incentives along those lines for solar, wind, cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel and other green alternatives. We must increase domestic energy production through carbon-free nuclear power and clean coal technology as well. I'm also cosponsoring legislation that would encourage conservation with tax credits for green buildings and legislation that would spark a revolution in clean hydrogen technology. There are many sources where we can move toward if we're willing to dig down deep and do what's necessary and walk away from those unnecessarily strong, critical, excessive environmental forces that don't speak to the welfare of this great country. Today, I introduced a discharge petition, something that isn't done regularly in Congress, something that isn't successful regularly but has been. I trust that this discharge motion will be. As of this point in time, with just a few hours with that discharge motion being on the floor, 93 of my colleagues have signed on, moving toward the 218 that are necessary. This petition, if effective with 218 signatures, will force a vote on Congressman Mac Thornberry's No More Excuses Energy Act, an Act suitably entitled, legislation to increase U.S. energy production and invest in alternative sources of energy as well. This appropriately named legislation would impact the price at the pump and lower electric bills. It would encourage the construction of new refineries, boost alternative energy, supplemental energy development by extending the wind production tax credit for 10 years, giving some certainty that if I were to invest in wind energy production, I would have a reasonable amount of time to see a return on my investment. It would increase American oil production by allowing environmentally sound drilling in Alaska, the Outer Continental Shelf and the Gulf of Mexico, and it would help increase our supply of electricity by encouraging the construction of new nuclear power plants. Even leaders, in fact, one of the founders of Greenpeace, have come out strongly encouraging the use of nuclear power as being clean, green energy, not given over to continuing production of greenhouse gases. Rather than increase taxes on domestic energy production, as some in Congress have proposed, I'm working to pass sound legislation that will bring down the price of gas and reduce our dependence on Middle East oil. Legislation like the No More Excuses Energy Act of Mac Thornberry would increase the supply of American energy and increase the number of good paying jobs in this country and in my district, the Seventh District of Michigan. Policies such as a 23-year moratorium on exploring and developing offshore production of clean and green natural gas need to be lifted in order to lower prices and reduce our dependence on foreign gas. Natural gas provides 23 percent of our Nation's energy. It should be more. And America is the only developed Nation that prohibits offshore production and exploration of this clean, green, clean burning resource, and Americans are paying higher electricity and heating bills as a result of this. Like all of you, I'm tired of paying these high prices. Whether it's for my motorcycle, whether it's for my car or whether it's for my pick- up truck, I'm tired of paying this because it's unnecessary, as we've done nothing to change that except talk, and it's time to put action into place. I know high prices are affecting all of us. This is unacceptable. It is unacceptable for America to put up with this. The good people of south central Michigan, the good people of Michigan, the good people of the rest of the States in this wonderful country who depend on gasoline or diesel to get to work, drive their kids to baseball practice and visit family members deserve better. The volunteers who offer to drive veterans to VA hospitals in my district and other districts in other States deserve better. The volunteers who offer to drive Meals on Wheels to needy senior citizens deserve better than this. Our churches and synagogues, our places of worship all across this great country that will be looking at looming fuel bills that many will be unable to pay this coming heating season deserve better than this because America doesn't need to be in this situation. So I'm delighted that tonight I'm joined by a number of my colleagues who will add to what has been stated already, probably more eloquently, with points of experience that come from all over this country. I appreciate their commitment to doing something more than talking about energy independence, doing something more than talking about resuming America's position of leading the world in all areas, including the area of energy production and usage. We have blessed the world with our standard of living, with our technology and with our energy, and it is time to get about that project again. So at this time, I would like to ask my good friend and colleague from Georgia, Dr. Paul Broun, to add to what has been said. I appreciate you taking the time to be with us this evening.

Mr. WALBERG. In Alaska, in ANWR.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, it is my special privilege to recognize Detective Sergeant Jay Poupard on receiving the 2008 Attorney General Special Commendation Award. It is with great admiration and pride that I congratulate Detective Sergeant Poupard on behalf of all of those who have benefited from his dedicated service to Charlotte, Michigan and his proven ability to protect the lives of its citizens. Detective Sergeant Poupard is a member of the Michigan Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force. The ICAC Task Force is a nationwide program designed to assist state and local law enforcement agencies increase their capability to investigate offenders who use the Internet or other computer technology to sexually exploit children. The program is made up of 59 regional Task Force agencies and is funded by the United States Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The fast, shrewd action of Detective Sergeant Poupard and Detective Spence of Florida and the effective information exchange-between the ICAC Task Forces directly saved the life of an 8-year-old child. Detective Sergeant Poupard's skillful work and sharp sense of awareness also prevented further manufacture and distribution of child pornographic images. As a model to officers across the country, Detective Sergeant Poupard continues to carry out his duty to protect Michigan and the United States. The 2008 Attorney General Special Commendation Award was presented to Detective Sergeant Jay Poupard of Charlotte, Michigan for his extraordinary work which saved the life of a young child. His superior performance is worthy of this honor and indicative of his continued commitment to high standards and thorough investigative work. Madam Speaker, today I honor Detective Sergeant Jay Poupard for his esteemed service to the Charlotte community. May others know of my high regard for his outstanding performance and dedication to protecting our children, as well as my best wishes for Detective Sergeant Poupard in the future.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I submit the following for the Record: Name of Earmark and Amount: Advanced Drivetrains for Enhanced Mobility and Safety--$2.5 million. Bill Number: H.R. 5658. Account Information: Army, RDTE, PE 0603005A, Line 33. Legal Name and Address of Receiving Entity: Eaton Automotive, 19218 B Drive South, Marshall, MI 49068. Earmark Description: This request is for funding for the final phase of an on-going three phase program between Eaton and the US Army. Eaton has successfully worked with the Army for the past two years to develop specialized torque-modifying differentials for the HMMWV to improve the vehicle safety. The Phase I and II work was structured to first adapt commercial Eaton side-to-side torque modifying differentials to HMMWVs. These programs have proven very successful in quantitatively demonstrating improved vehicle safety. Prototype systems will be delivered to the Army for additional testing in May 2008. Military- hardened side-to-side systems will be subsequently developed and delivered in 2009. This Phase III funding request is for a center coupler to provide full active 4x4 torque management to military vehicles. Earmark Budget Model hardware function and vehicle maneuvers--15%--$375,000. Materials--modifications to transfer case and addition of differential--25%--$625,000. Preliminary Bench test and vehicle functional tests--10%--$250,000. Labor--Design/procure hardware, develop preliminary controls software--50%--$1,250,000. Total--$2,500,000. Total Phase III project cost: $3,500,000. Federal funds: $2,500,000. Eaton internal funds: $1,000,000. Percent matching funds = $1,000,000/$3,500,000 x 100% = 29%.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I submit the following for the Record: Name of Earmark and Amount: Cold Weather Layering System (CWLS)--$4.0 million. Bill Number: H.R. 5658. Account Information: Navy, O&M, MARINE CORPS, PE BA01-1106N, Line 010. Legal Name and Address of Receiving Entity: Peckham Industries, 2822 North Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Lansing, Michigan 48906. Earmark Description: The CWLS is part of the Marine Corps' Mountain and Cold Weather Clothing and Equipment Program, which provides lightweight, durable combat clothing that allows Marines to operate in all kinds of cold weather environments. It is the intent of the Commandant of the Marine Corps to provide warfighters with a ``capability set'' of clothing to facilitate expeditionary operations in mountainous and cold weather environments. The goal is for the CWLS to reduce the weight and volume that a Marine operating as dismounted infantry must carry to accomplish combat missions in those conditions. Earmark Budget: Cost of Garments Per System (for Peckham/Polartec layer of system ONLY)--$137.07; Test and build approximately 29,000 total systems--$4,000,000; Garment Production--$2,000,000; Materials-- $1,600,000; Quality Control/Fielding--$400,000; Total--$4,000,000. The Cold Weather Layering System includes: 1 Polartec Windpro MARPAT Jacket; 1 Polartec Stretch Windpro Hat; 1 Set of Polartec PowerDry Silkweight underwear top and pants; 1 Set of Polartec PowerDry Grid long underwear top and pants.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I submit the following to the Record: Name of Earmark and Amount: Multi Climate Protection System (MCPS) for the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps--$8.0 million. Bill Number: H.R. 5658. Account Information: Navy, OTHER PROCUREMENT, PE 0, Line 097. Legal Name and Address of Receiving Entity: Peckham Industries, 2822 North Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Lansing, Michigan 48906. Earmark Description: The Chief of Naval Operations' FY 2000 Aircrew Systems Operational Advisory Group identified that Naval and Marine Corps aircrew personnel need an improved protective clothing system. Until the MCPS was developed and introduced in FY 2004, aircrew garments in the Navy and Marine Corps predominantly contained textiles and designs consistent with 1970s' technology. Advancements in protective fibers and garments were introduced to meet the demands on aircrews by providing moisture management, heating and cooling performance in passive and active layers and comfort via modular components. Earmark Budget: Test and field approximately 4,689 total systems-- $8,000,000; Garment Production--$3,400,000; Materials--$4,200,000; Quality Control/Fielding--$400,000; Total--$8,000,000. The Multi Climate Protection System includes: 1 Goretex parka and 1 trouser 1 Polartec Windpro FR with Nomex Jacket and 1 Vest 1 Polartec Thermal FR with Nomex shirt, 1 overalls and 1 pants 1 Polartec Powerstretch FR with Nomex shirt and 1 pants 1 Polartec Windpro FR with Nomex face mask

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, it is my special privilege to recognize the 2008 Lenawee County ATHENA Award recipients Durstyne Farnan, O.P., and Dr. Nancy Kelly, DVM, and Parthenon Award recipient United Bank and Trust. It is with great admiration and pride that I congratulate these individuals and this company on behalf of all of those who have benefited from their demonstrated excellence in their professions and dedicated service to Lenawee County and the State of Michigan. ATHENA International was founded in the early 1980s by Martha Mertz, who while serving as the sole woman on the board of directors of the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce, was inspired to recognize female business leaders in her community whom she felt had largely been overlooked. Thus, the first ATHENA Award was presented in 1982 and 5,000 more have been awarded since to honor men and women across the globe for their professional excellence, community service, and active role in enabling women to achieve success as business and community leaders. Durstyne Farnan, better known as Sister Dusty, has devoted much of her life to promoting international peace. An advocate for women's liberties worldwide, Sister Dusty has traveled to countries around the globe assisting women in other cultures achieve independence and promote peace. Additionally, she has educated students at Siena Heights University on the serious subject of the trafficking of women and children. Dr. Nancy Kelly has faithfully served Lenawee County as a successful veterinarian and trusted mentor for many years. She is the on-call veterinarian for the Adrian, Madison, and Fairfield Township Fire Departments and holds an impressive record of extensive community service in the area. In addition to assisting veterinary students secure highly beneficial externships, she selflessly devotes much of her time to mentoring several local female students of veterinary medicine. United Bank and Trust has a history of producing successful businesswomen and stands as a fine model to companies throughout Lenawee County. As a company committed to providing training and development opportunities to all employees, United has a track record of promoting women to leadership positions. United Bank and Trust has earned respect as a hometown bank for their tailored service to the Lenawee community and for encouraging each of their employees to volunteer within the community. This year's ATHENA Award for Lenawee County was presented to Sister Dusty, Dr. Nancy Kelly, and United Bank and Trust for demonstrating excellence, creativity, and initiative in their profession and for actively assisting women in realizing their full leadership potential. The 2008 winners join an international network of men and women who work together to create leadership opportunities and encourage the empowerment of women leaders. Madam Speaker, today I honor the recipients of the 2008 ATHENA Award for their invaluable service to the Lenawee community. May others know of my high regard for their commitment to promoting women around the world, as well as my best wishes for them in the future.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Yes, I am, in its present form.

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Madam Speaker. This motion to recommit is simple and straightforward. It maintains our commitment to safety. And it does nothing--I repeat nothing--to prevent OSHA from developing a combustible dust safety standard. This motion is simply a way for us to tell our constituents, the hardworking families who are struggling with the rising cost of living and an uncertain economy, that we're sensitive to their concerns; that we recognize that rising food costs, in particular, are a difficult burden to bear for many families; and that we know that in these difficult times, the very last thing we should be doing is driving up the cost of food for our children and our families. The motion I have offered makes clear that the new mandates included in this bill will not be imposed on food grain production until we have determined that it will not cause an increase in prices at the grocery store. During today's debate, we heard numerous objections to this bill, including its impact on the grain and feed industry that is so integral to food production and distribution in this country. I know that Members on both sides of the aisle have heard directly from the grain industry on this measure, and many of us have wondered how we can enhance worker safety without unnecessarily driving up food costs. The answer, Madam Speaker, is to pass this motion to recommit. By voting ``yes'' on this motion, OSHA will still be required to begin immediate development of a combustible dust standard. By voting ``yes'' on this motion, there will be no delay in implementation of these new rules for facilities that do not handle food grains. And lest anyone be concerned about the workers at facilities producing the grains we eat, if we pass this measure, these workers will continue to be protected as well under the same standard that has already produced a 60 percent reduction in grain facility explosions. Feed, corn, and flour mills are already covered by existing OSHA grain-handling regulations. As a member of both the House Education and Labor Committee and Agriculture Committee, I understand that the food manufacturing industry is affected by combustible dust as much as any other industry. Reregulating and duplicating existing Federal regulations on American family farmers and small rural businesses could seriously impact commodity prices and drive up the cost of everything from a loaf of bread to a gallon of gasoline. I find it ironic that at the same time the leaders within the majority party are advocating for up to $300 million in additional spending for international food aid in the supplemental, these same folks are simultaneously considering legislation that could further drive up the price of food here at home. My motion to recommit ensures we conduct a thorough economic analysis on the impact of H.R. 5522 on food prices. This MTR will ensure we do not unnecessarily cause irreparable harm to family farms, agricultural producers and American consumers by driving up the price of food because of another unintended consequence in the majority's continued rush to regulate first and ask questions later. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, today we observe the anniversary of the Armenian genocide, a tragic persecution of Armenians that was both a systematic and intentional ethnic cleansing. Before this tragedy, Armenians had only limited freedom living under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. Armenians did not have the liberties that Americans consider to be self-evident. In particular, they were limited in public practice of their Christian faith. Because the international community paid little attention, the conditions of Armenians deteriorated throughout the 1800s. In the late 1800s, the situation became worse. Ottomans began to provoke, exploit, and murder many Armenians. Europe and North America took notice, but were weary of the economic and political consequences of intervening. On this day in 1915, hundreds of influential and important Armenians were taken from their homes, imprisoned, and stripped of their remaining freedoms. The Ottoman military marched crowds of Armenians to be deported or exterminated. Hundreds of thousands Armenians were victims of this massacre, and an exact number of casualties is still unknown. The systematic, state-sponsored extermination of these good, decent people demonstrates the need for protection of individual liberties and from injustice. Years later, Adolf Hitler referenced the Armenian genocide, ``the physical destruction of the enemy,'' as an example of the rest of the world forgetting or ignoring. My hope is that we can recognize these stains from the past and learn an important lesson from history. We must never forget about those in other lands who do not enjoy the freedoms found in America. We must not forget to stand for what is right and stand beside widows, orphans, and our fellow brothers. Madam Speaker, today we honor the lives lost during the Armenian genocide and in their memory pledge to protect liberty and freedom by preventing similar injustices in the future.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. I want to thank my colleague and friend and ranking member from California (Mr. McKeon) for allowing this discussion tonight, and to start off I think by portraying reality here of the billions of dollars that have been invested. And I certainly wouldn't say wasted, but the investment of billions of dollars into education certainly has not, according to this chart, and I think reality, shown the impact we would have dreamed of, expected and desired. I think that is why the discussion that we are having tonight is so good, especially centered around reauthorizing a major component that there has been a lot of hopes and dreams about, No Child Left Behind, producing in this country a greater quality and achievement in education. I don't pride myself in being a contrarian, but on this issue, I am somewhat of a contrarian. I hearken back to the Northwest Ordinance, that great statement that is included in many of our State Constitutions that says religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. And I think that last section, where it says schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged, is where we are interested in tonight. It is our concern. It is our desire to encourage schools and the means of education. That statement, that directive from the Northwest Ordinance is found, as I said, in many State Constitutions including that of my own State of Michigan. The fact of the matter is that as a result of many redundant programs, well meaning though they may be, and yet programs and mandates that are put on our system, we have encumbered education to the point that it is very difficult on the ground in the unique classrooms that we have in every school district, with every student in the classroom who is a different student than the student sitting next to them. Having three children and having gone through the public education system, the private education, and alternative system at some point in time in their educational experience, I know that even those three children from the same family learned in different ways and thankfully had the options available to them that met their needs at each step along the way, at least as much as possible, allowing achievement. So, frankly, as we come to reauthorizing No Child Left Behind, it would be my preference that we would not; that we would end No Child Left Behind and turn it back to the States, turn our dollars and our interests toward giving opportunities for higher education, which in this country sets the standard for the rest of the world. Industry and business technology, working hand in hand with higher education, then to be an assist to establish patterns for our elementary and secondary education to bring them to the point of a completion, at least to that point, so that they can go on into higher education, trade schools, or in industry and business, and achieve, knowing reality and to a point as well, I understand that No Child Left Behind will most likely be reauthorized in some form. So, for that reason I would certainly plead for flexibility. Having done that, I have cosponsored legislation that has been given the name A-PLUS, which would allow that flexibility for States to be brought forward, that would allow States that had taken a purpose statement to produce schools and the means of education that would foster growth in our government, in our society, in our educational classrooms, that would give opportunities for States to opt out of No Child Left Behind having proven that they had in place a plan for providing data that was good, evaluation that was quality, and an educational program that was moving toward excellence. For example, I was the product of public education all the way through and even entering into university. My mother and three aunts were public school educators, beginning most of them in one-room schools teaching, and then moving into the Chicago public school system. My daughter-in-law is a public school teacher on the south side of Chicago, a gifted teacher, a teacher who her first year taught as a full-time substitute because of the need in a special needs classroom where the teacher, out of frustration one day, got up, walked out of the class, and never came back. My daughter-in-law was given the opportunity to work with these young people who needed an education, needed someone who would invest themselves in their little lives, a fourth grade classroom. My daughter-in-law Erin absolutely loved her first year of teaching as a substitute, a full-time substitute. She had the freedom without some of the paperwork, some of the criteria, both of the Illinois and Chicago public school systems, but also No Child Left Behind. She saw achievement with the opportunity to meet with parents, to provide expectations, but also the opportunity to work in partnership with them and working with these special needs students to see improvement along the way. Thankfully, she received a full-time appointment to that same classroom the next year as a full-time teacher, and soon found out that, with the weight of paperwork and regulation that was redundant upon each other coming from the Federal on down through the State and through the Chicago system as well, she was greatly frustrated to the point of wondering whether she was cut out to be a teacher. Fortunately, with good counsel from her administration and, I must admit, from my wife and myself as well, she continued and saw impact. And yet, the frustrations of not having the flexibility to deal with individual needs almost scuttled her attempt at teaching. One final point I would make, Mr. McKeon, is from my own experience in going through seven No Child Left Behind hearings across my district in each of the seven counties, and having teachers, administrators, school board members and parents speak to the issue of No Child Left Behind and reauthorization, speak to the issue of highly qualified teachers and the frustration that that produces in some of our smaller school districts, rural school districts in trying to deal with that, yet having qualified teachers who are achieving well in the classroom, and yet because of the requirement for highly qualified that No Child Left Behind puts in place, the frustration that comes. I stood in a special needs classroom at a local intermediate school district, and I watched a young man who, as I understand it, had no mental difficulties but great physical difficulties to the point that the only way that he could be administered a test was by verbal administration of that test from his teacher. And with his blinking of his eye once for yes, two for no, he took the test. But then I watched as the teacher went through that same test a second time to make sure that she had achieved answering right according to what he had indicated. Now, that adds time. And when you add redundancies and lack of flexibility all the way from the Federal Government on down, it frustrates education and it takes away the opportunity of some of these great teachers out there and committed parents, school boards, and students to meet the needs of their students, in their classrooms, in their communities. So my friend from California, I would applaud you in pushing further that, not only would we most likely reauthorize, but that we would produce the flexibility that allows creativity to abound in our classrooms, parents to be involved, teachers who want to teach and not just be social workers or mother confessors at times, but to be in the role of teaching and working side by side with parents and the flexibility that can only come by understanding that schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

Mr. WALBERG

Mr. WALBERG. Well, I have a lot of comments on that, but you said it so well. I appreciate the commonsense approach from a place where Davy Crockett roamed. I know that for a fact. Again, we are talking about, Congressman Davis, we are talking liberty. We are talking about people who say I am not asking for anything except the opportunities. I am willing to be responsible. Generally speaking, I am willing to be held accountable. If I have the resources to use, the resources to spend, if I have the resources to save, to invest, and take the risks as necessary, if I have a job that I can produce those resources and move further, all it says is that I get more liberty and I get full use of it. If I am tied to April 23 as my time when I can say I finished paying taxes for this year to the Federal Government, now I can buy for myself, but I have got to start thinking about paying taxes next year April 15 as well, it ties me back. None of us here on the floor aren't saying there is some tax base that is necessary. But what we are saying is we have gone way overboard. When you pointed out that if the majority proposal Democrat budget goes through and it's paid for as they intend with a $683 billion tax increase, which was passed, which does away with all of those tax relief issues that we had in 2001 and 2003, and have benefited this great country since that time, and then it adds other things to it like the marriage penalty back into it, does away with the ending of the AMT, alternative minimum tax, an onerous regressive tax that's strapping down more of our taxpayers than ever were assumed to be in it. If we put all that in place, we see less liberty, less freedom, more opportunity for abuse by government that doesn't know how to say no. We end up frustrating ourselves again, don't we.

Mr. WALBERG. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. And, again, I trust this has been helpful for taxpayers to hear at least some that will defend. And there are others in this Congress. It has been said that we are red state, blue state, totally divided in this country. When you get to the common-sense issues, the virtues that people see as common sense, we are not divided, we are not red state, blue state. We are a common based unified people that believe in common sense things. Jonathan Witherspoon, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, said: A Republic once equally poised must either preserve its virtue or lose its liberty. Virtue of hard work, the virtue of risk taking and entrepreneurial spirit, the virtue of accountability, of responsibility, of honesty, of integrity, those are virtues. And they go all into what makes our country great and what our taxpayers generally commit themselves to on a common base. And when we break down those virtues and give those away, we destroy ourselves and our liberty in the process. So let's fight together to stop this $683 billion tax grab that will frustrate this country and take it back as opposed to pressing it forward. I thank my colleagues for spending this time with me tonight. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALBERG. I thank my friend from Minnesota, and appreciate your passion as well in fighting this good fight. I would yield now to the Congressman from Tennessee, David Davis.

Mr. WALBERG. And I appreciate that fact. There are good pieces of legislation, whether it be setting a cap on spending or setting a moratorium on earmarks, and looking at a way to get control of that so we are not wasting dollars. These are common-sense issues that taxpayers generally look at and say, what is the problem? This ought to be just common sense, to have a line item veto, to have a balanced budget amendment. All of the above speaks to the common taxpayer, which I am one and you are one and all of us who have spoken tonight are one. It speaks common sense to the taxpayer saying, this just ought to be the way it is, because we are willing to do for ourselves if you leave us the opportunity. So I certainly appreciate your passion on this issue and the fact of your awareness of tax issues having been a tax attorney and understanding that, while there are taxes necessary, that we have gone way beyond the limit. We have gone beyond reality. There is little debate right now on Capitol Hill about whether the American economy is struggling. That is just there. We recognize the fact. And some of us who are in States that are struggling even more so, like my own wonderful State of Michigan that has all of the resources available, and yet we are frustrated. The real conversation in living rooms across the country is about how to get our economy moving again. Essentially, this debate boils down to one question, the question that I was asked in conversations in town hall meetings that I have in various ways, and that question is: Should America promote economic growth and job creation, or raise taxes to destroy jobs and economic opportunity? Right now, Republicans, our colleagues are asking all House Members to decide which side of this debate they are on by forcing votes on a bill that I introduced that we have referred to tonight, that is the Tax Increase Prevention Act, House Resolution 2734. House Members have to choose whether they support Speaker Pelosi's budget proposal that in total is the largest single tax increase ever promoted in the history of the United States, a $3,000 per taxpayer tax increase overnight. With so much money already being wasted in Washington, I believe it is wrong for Congress to try and take more money out of the paychecks of hard-working Americans. My bill, to make more point about it, would make permanent the tax relief of 2001 and 2003, and stop tax increases on raising children, earning money, saving and investing, operating a small business, adopting a child, paying off college loans, and even dying. Consider the implications of the Democrat's proposed $680 billion tax increase in 2011 alone. Marginal income tax rates will increase by anywhere from 9 percent to 50 percent, with the lowest tax bracket receiving the highest tax rate increase. That is not talking to the rich and wealthy, that is talking again of the lowest tax bracket. Capital gains rates for individuals will increase dramatically, punishing saving and investing. Restoration of the marriage penalty tax, that is a punitive tax that thankfully we got rid of, and now they want to put it back. The child tax credit will be slashed 50 percent, raising taxes by $500 per child. The death tax will go from 0 percent to 55 percent. I have always held the conviction that the American citizen should keep as much as their hard-earned money as possible. With Americans facing rising health care costs, high energy prices, and economic instability, the last thing families need is to be hit with a massive job killing tax increase. Every week in my home State, I meet with Michiganders, as I did this weekend, who are working harder than ever before and at best breaking even. Michigan families and businesses have, unfortunately, felt firsthand the powerful negative impact of tax increases. These working families' wages have been slashed by higher taxes on income and on small businesses. During our Governor Jennifer Granholm's administration, Michigan has experienced job losses, declining personal incomes, diminishing home values, and the highest unemployment rate in the Nation, sadly. By proposing a massive $3,000 per taxpayer tax increase, Democrats in this Congress are following the same failed blueprint that has threatened to ditch our economy in Michigan and destroy Michigan jobs. Instead of working on tax hikes that ultimately make America less competitive, I believe Congress should stop this $683 billion money grab from taxpayers. Congress could better spend time eliminating ineffective and inefficient government programs, making health care more affordable, and passing any energy legislation to move America toward energy independence and reduce energy prices. The debate over whether to raise taxes is just the beginning of a long battle over America's economic future. By making tax relief permanent and continuing to grow our economy, Congress can go an awful long way to restore the trust of the American people, build a better and brighter future for our country, and avoid the economic suffering now felt in States like Michigan. It doesn't have to be that way. And I certainly appreciate the fact that there are those of us who are fighting for taxpayers' interests. I know the 13 of us who came in as freshmen came in for a reason. That is the smallest freshman class in the history of the United States, probably. But we came in resolute that the taxpayer was to be served; that taxpayers were paying too much, not too little; that we were regulating too much, not too little; that we were destroying the incentives of private hard-working citizens, risk takers, entrepreneurs to do the job that they can only do. Government doesn't do that. And that is why 13 of us came while others lost and weren't sent back because of overspending and overtaxing. And it is sure a privilege to join with the both of you here in the room tonight. I guess I would offer opportunity for any final comments before we are forced to close this interesting conversation this evening, hopefully of benefit to the taxpayers out there on this eve of tax freedom day. Hopefully it has been interesting, but more than that, it has been something that would stir them into action as well to say: Enough is enough, and we stand for freedom.

Mr. WALBERG. It can't continue. If it does, we have lost it all. Jefferson said the government that governs best governs least. And it wasn't simply govern least to allow people less opportunity, but it is to give them more freedom; to give them more of their own resources to make better decisions for themselves, making better decisions on basic needs. That was the genius of what we had here in a capitalistic system, a system that said we will offer freedom and opportunity. You make your choices, you determine your lifestyle. And, in turn, as we also encouraged through supplementing what went on in the home, what went on in the school, what went on in the church and making it a common theme that we are our brother's keeper, but it is with our own resources, with our own choices, the opportunity that we have to expand and meet needs of others. Ultimately in doing that ourselves, we are also blessed. We also felt the warmth of saying I lifted someone up that was falling, and I also know that there are plenty of others who would come to my aid, individuals who are family members, who are community members right from my own area that would reach out, and, at last resort, if necessary, maybe there was something in the government. But it is reversed now, where the first place we go is the government. Of course, that causes the ramp-up of costs that now results in the largest tax increase in the history of the United States being offered and passed just recently. And, if allowed to be completed and my legislation isn't put in place to make permanent those tax relief issues of 2001 and 2003, we will have a $683 billion tax increase over the next 5 years, and on January 1, 2011, the taxpayers in my State and across the country, generally speaking, will pay upwards of $3,000 more the day after December 31 than the day before. That is not the way to go. We have to stop it. The taxpayers out there, whether they be in Tennessee, Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, or Indiana, are all saying the same thing; they just want us to hear an answer.

Mr. WALBERG. Well, it is very similar, if I might add, to see how large expenditures go out with so little oversight, and so much statement that, oh, well, it has to be done. If we don't do it, who will? And there are so many needs. Well, there are. I mentioned earlier this evening I had the opportunity to attend a breakfast fundraiser for Boys and Girls Clubs in my area. They do a great work, and they are doing it on the basis of individual contributions, corporate entities that give not only financial support, but also human support as well. The speaker, a president of a major industry in my area, she said it so eloquently, that it has come to a point in time where we have to find ways to reduce the cost by drawing together and not having redundancies that add cost, but become more efficient and more effective doing not only the same work, but more work for less cost as a result of the effort that is shared. In government we have to get that concept. We have to understand that there is a person called the taxpayer, and a taxpayer that is not of unlimited resources, especially if we want to keep freedom around so that our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren will enjoy the benefits we have. If we are to pass it on to them in such a way that they will have equal or better freedoms than we had, we have to get on the stick. So, absolutely, I have been floored since coming here that it is so easy to spend money in this Chamber without thought of actually who will generate those resources, and we frustrate the engine of the economy.

Mr. WALBERG. And that is not the idea that the framers of our Constitution had in mind.

Mr. WALBERG. If I could break in, didn't we hear at the beginning of this year, January 4th and prior to that, that if the majority party had control we would see the prices go down on gas and other things? Didn't we hear that? Have we seen that take place?

Mr. WALBERG. I thank my friend. I only have to think about the fact that to the taxpayer in my State, that if this $680 billion tax increase goes through to pay for additional spending, deficit spending, in a budget that goes way beyond what is necessary, it means that on top of the burden that my State government has given to the hard- working taxpayers of Michigan, it gives a $3,000 per taxpayer increase on January 1, 2011, automatically. And, like you, my taxpayers that I meet with each weekend back in the district and in the 140 town hall type meetings I have held since January 4th, they are not saying, Mr. Congressman, please give us more taxes. Please give us more gas tax. Please raise the cost of our fuels. They are not saying that at all. They are saying, give us some freedom. Give us some liberty. Give us some relief. Let us do for ourselves what we can and should do, if we have the resources to do it. So you hit it right on the head. I am privileged tonight as well to have another good friend and colleague, a member of our freshman class, an outstanding spokesperson for the taxpayer, for all things that people like John Adams and Jefferson and Washington and others spoke for when they framed all that we are pleased with in the United States, the Congresswoman from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann. I am sure you have significant things to say about this great event we have tomorrow, Tax Freedom Day. But looking on the other side of the picture, why in the world we have to have that type of a day so late in the year? I yield to the Congresswoman from Minnesota.

Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity tonight to be on this floor to speak on an issue that is near and dear to a lot of our hearts, and certainly a lot of our constituents' hearts, because tomorrow, April 23, is Taxpayer Freedom Day. It's an opportunity, for the first time this year, for taxpayers to start working for themselves and not simply for their government to pay taxes. On April 15 we paid our taxes. On April 23, days beyond that, we come to a point where it is no longer an issue of working to pay just the taxes that each taxpayer needs to pay, but now we go on to do for ourselves what we can and should do that would allow us to do things for others that we would like to do as well, to benefit them, to meet needs that cannot simply be met by government, that can be met in special ways by ourselves. This morning I had the privilege of being at a Big Brothers, Big Sisters breakfast fundraiser and hearing an outstanding speaker who was from business and industry, a leader in her own right with a major corporation in my district, and yet appealing to the fact that in the private sector, in charities and special functions, that there is a place for finding ways to do it better, quicker, faster, more efficiently and cheaper in the process, that there needs to be ways to collaborate in such a way that organizations that sometimes are redundant and overlap come together, if not to join forces as the same group, but to join forces in providing resources to each other that they don't have to duplicate. I said to the speaker afterwards, you know, that's, indeed, what government ought to be doing as well. The only way we will do that, though, is by forcing ourselves to do things appropriately to allow the engine of our economy, that being the private sector, individual worker, entrepreneur, risk taker, business person, industry, to do for themselves only what they can do. And to do that, they certainly need to have the resources in place that will enable them to function successfully. By having to work until April 23 just to pay taxes, that's not the right approach to accomplish that. I recently was hooked on the HBO mini-series ``John Adams,'' a mini- series on the take-off on the book written by David McCullough, a noted historian on the Framers of our way of life here in the United States, our governmental system, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and all that makes this country great. And I was again impressed by the character of the Framers of our system of government who saw freedom and liberty as the ultimate priority and saw that freedom and liberty ultimately flowing from individual property rights, individual rights to use resources that they had, and the opportunity ultimately in the Revolution to break away from the King and be able to control more of one's own largesse, limited or great as it might be. I was impressed by the character of these gentlemen and those behind them, the men and women who supported them. I was impressed with the fact that they believed in people, in individuals, in their ability to make good decisions, their ability to choose well, their ability to spend their resources more wisely, more efficiently, and better, certainly, than a larger body known as the government. They were also appreciative, Mr. Speaker, of the fact that these individuals, in greatness of their own hearts, could reach out and meet the medical needs, meet the security needs, meet the housing and care needs of individuals, and go beyond just themselves because they had ability to do that, if their government allowed them the liberty and freedom of choice because they had resources to do that as well. I believe that our Framers never ever would have envisioned what we've come to today. They would have never envisioned that we, as individual taxpayers, would work until April 23, after paying taxes on April 15, just to pay the taxes that we paid on April 15. That is what they revolted for, that lack of liberty and choice in using their own resources. Someone far more significant than I once said, ``The ability to tax is the ability to destroy.'' I can't talk about other States, and I'm delighted to have another Member with me on the floor tonight to discuss this issue as well, my friend and colleague and the freshman class president, of which I'm part, Bill Sali from Idaho. I can't talk, Congressman, about your State, but I can talk about Michigan, a great State, a great State of natural resources, surrounded on three sides by the Great Lakes if we count our upper peninsula, and I would not forget the Upers, surrounded on three and a half sides by the Great Lakes, with natural resources in the ground, growing on top of the ground, and with natural resources known as human resources that would be second to none. A State that has a history of producing things, of manufacturing, leading in manufacturing, developing the auto industry. The district of which I represent, right in the heart of it was where Henry Ford developed the whole process that has become the assembly line approach to the auto industry. And yet this great State at this point in time sits at, sadly, the number one worst unemployment rate in the Nation. According to CEO Magazine last week, we rank the 49th worst business climate in the United States. We have people moving out of the State to find jobs. We have our friends in Indiana recruiting jobs from Michigan and doing it far more easily because of what we have done in our State. A State that truly is being destroyed by the ability to tax. Most recently, the State legislature and our Governor went the wrong direction and frustrated any type of turnaround by increasing income tax, by putting a tax on services for the first time, and then putting a new business tax in place. And then having the cry come up from the taxpayer about the service tax, they rescinded that and put a surcharge on top of the business tax. And then we have the chutzpah in ads and otherwise that say that we are open for business. I love my State. I love the people of my State. And I think we are Wolverines because we're tenacious, as de Tocqueville said. But we are frustrating the engine of the economy by the excessive taxation that we have put on. I want to talk more about it, but I know Congressman Sali has much to say on this as well because, Congressman, you are known, first and foremost, as a man of principle, but a friend of the taxpayer, a man who came to Congress because of that agenda to provide less frustration and more opportunity for taxpayers. And I know that tomorrow you will rejoice that we have reached Taxpayer Freedom Day. But I know as well, my friend, that you wish it was far sooner than April 23. I yield to my friend from Idaho.

Mr. WALBERG. And not status quo government.