Newsroom
Latest News
House Chamber, Washington, D.C.
February 12, 2009
M. Speaker:
I rise again to urge the majority to consider very carefully the damage they are doing to our nation’s economy by passing this unprecedented spending measure.
There is still time to heed the warnings from economists across the nation that this bill will do long-term damage to the growth of our nation’s economy for many years to come.
This is not mere economic theory: it is the consistent effect every time and everywhere that governments have tried to spend their way to prosperity.
February 10, 2009
Mme. Speaker:
Before we continue with a stimulus policy that has consistently failed to stimulate anything but government, I think the supporters of this program need to answer some very simple questions.
For example, the President himself told us yesterday that this $800 billion of new spending will produce up to four million new jobs. That comes to $200,000 per job.
Question: Why don’t we just send those four million lucky families a check for $100,000, and save half of what the President wants to spend – by his own numbers.
House Chamber, Washington D.C.
February 10, 2009
M. Speaker:
Benjamin Franklin warned us that “Passion governs, but she never governs wisely.”
As the Congress and the President rush to enact the latest in a long line of mega-spending bills, I think we would be well advised to spend a little more time on the dispassionate math of the matter.
House Chamber, Washington, D.C.
February 4, 2009
M. Speaker:
The mantra we hear from the Left is that government – rather than the productive sector – needs to create new jobs. According to our new President, the $825 billion spending bill will create 3 million new jobs.
That sounded pretty good to me at a time when our economy is hurting so badly, until I pulled out a pocket calculator and did the math. Three million new jobs for $825 billion. Ladies and Gentlemen, that comes to $275,000 per job!
M. Speaker:
I saw S-CHIP implemented in California, and I can tell you that it’s a prime example of the law of unintended consequences. Since its inception, we’ve watched as S-CHIP has been slowly replacing employer health plans with government-paid health plans – with spiraling costs to taxpayers. Employers discovered that they could avoid their own plans, knowing that their employees would be covered by S-CHIP.
M. Speaker:
When we speak of running up a $2 trillion debt to pay for this year of unprecedented spending, where does that money come from?
We don’t have it, and so we borrow it.
Where do we borrow it from? We will borrow that $2 trillion from the same pool of funds that would otherwise have been available for businesses seeking to add jobs, or homebuyers seeking to buy homes or consumers seeking to buy new cars or appliances.
House Chamber, Washington, D.C., January 27, 2009. Mr. Chairman:
With this measure, the new administration seems bound and determined to continue the failed policy of the past administration. This proves what I like to call “McClintock’s Second Law of Political Physics,” which is, the more we spend on our mistakes, the less willing we are to admit them.
This policy has failed everywhere and every time it has been tried for a simple reason: government cannot INJECT a dollar INTO the economy that it first has not taken OUT of the economy.
House Chamber, Washington, D.C., January 27, 2009, Mr. Speaker:
Much has been said about the chilling effect this legislation will have on our economy because of the endless lawsuits it makes possible – including for grievances that may stretch back 30 years or more. And I certainly share those concerns.
But I want to express a deeper concern with this legislation: I believe it hurts the cause of equality and opportunity in the workplace by making it more difficult for people who most need jobs and most want jobs to get them.
January 26, 2009. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the President not to waive the Federal law on emission standards that is currently protecting Californians from Governor Schwarzenegger's crusade to save our planet by destroying our economy. Putting aside the highly questionable junk science behind the Governor's proposal, the net effect would add up to $5,000 to the price of a new car.
January 22, 2009 Speech in Support of House Joint Resolution 3, House Chamber, Washington, D.C.
M. Speaker:
This resolution presents the House with its last chance to admit that the Bush bailout has not worked. And it will not work because of a simple and self-evident truth:
Government cannot inject a single dollar into the economy that it has not first taken out of the economy.
It’s true that if I take a dollar from Peter and give it to Paul, Paul has one more dollar to spend and that dollar will ripple through the economy.