Jack Kingston: “I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I wanted to also say, the gentleman from Maryland talked about a company, and I…”

“I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I wanted to also say, the gentleman from Maryland talked about a company, and I am not familiar with this company, but a company that is moving out of America because of our burdensome Tax Code. Does that not prove the point that we need tax reform as championed by Mr. Camp, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee? We need a Tax Code that is competitive. This company is probably leaving to get away from a burdensome, complicated tax system that is killing jobs. Those jobs are going overseas. They need to stay in America. Mr. Speaker, to create jobs, we have to have a Tax Code that is clear, fair, concise, one that creates jobs. But we also need a regulatory burden that does the same thing: one that is clear; one that is concise; one that uses cost-benefit analysis. I can't understand why there are Members of the House that oppose cost-benefit analysis on new regulations. It is a matter of common sense, because our regulatory burden, as much as the Tax Code, is driving jobs offshore. We don't need that. One of the things that was lost in the debate earlier that I find just mind-boggling is the ability to fight forest fires, of all things. As Smokey the Bear says, ``Only you can prevent forest fires.'' Well, I guess towards this administration he is saying, ``Only you can promote forest fires through your ridiculous regulatory climate.'' And then let me say this.…”