app, or online at c-span.org. >> thursday the japanese prime minister will address a joint meeting of congress. he will meet with president biden at the white house and attend a state dinner in his honor during his visit to the u.s. the joined meeting begins thursday at 11:00 a.m. eastern on our free mobile video app, online at c- span.org. >> the house will be in order. >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of governing congress like no other. since 1979 we have been your primary source for capitol hill providing balanced unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policy is debated and decided with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered cable.

>> white house budget director young testified in president biden's newly released 2025 budget request. she outlined some of the priorities laid out in the proposal including tax cuts for the middle class, lowering healthcare costs, childcare investments, and protections for social security and medicare. other topics included funding for ukraine, national debt, and inflation reduction. this is two hours.

>> all right, let me call this hearing of the budget to order. >> all right. let me call this hearing of the budget committee to order. let me thank my colleagues for indulging the late start at 10:15 instead of 10:00 today because i had a presentation to make at the supreme court, so thank you for indulging that. i was presenting to the judicial conference. i don't

know which one is which. >> [ laughter ] >> so, let me first say good morning to our committee members present and offer a special welcome to shalanda young. director, it is always a pleasure to have you here before the committee . there is simply no better communicator of budget procedure than you and president biden is very lucky to have you in this important position. as the president is fond of saying, a budget is a statement of value. that message is salient this year as president biden and maga republicans offer starkly different visions of our country's future. on the one hand, president biden released a fiscally

responsible budget that puts the middle class first, cuts the deficit by $3 trillion, and paves the way for a stronger, safer, more prosperous america. on the other hand, maga republicans voted to undo progrowth investments creating jobs, driving a clean energy boom, and lowering cost for household across the country, all while calling to make the trump tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. today we will hear about the values represented by the biden budget like fighting for the middle class, lowering costs for families, and investing in communities. for example, president biden's budget guarantees 12 weeks of the family and medical leave. it would bring back the expanded child tax credit which cut poverty by half and increased funding for pell grants to make education accessible and

affordable to all students. the biden budget lowers prescription drug costs for tens of millions of americans. for example, it would build on medicare's authority to negotiate the prices of prescription drugs, a history making initiative in the inflation reduction act. medicare could negotiate the prices of at least 50 drugs per year reducing the cost of medicines and saving medicare $200 billion over 10 years. the biden budget reflects the commitment to fighting climate change, a danger too many republicans pretend does not even exist, ending unfair fossil fuel tax breaks and requiring highflying owners of private jets to pay fairly for the damages they cause. as we have heard in this committee the international monetary fund estimates subsidies at over 600 billion dollars, with a b -- $600 billion a year.

they keep getting massive handouts while the middle class flips the bill. contribution to america's fiscal health continues to dwindle and i refer you to this graphic which shows how much corporate tax revenues are in our overall revenue picture. they are less and less in balance. maga republicans value defunding the tax so tax cheats can keep cheating with impunity and as we have seen, they want secrecy. they will not come clean to the american people on which services they would actually cut to help the billionaire elite. that should tell you something. one thing we have learned, when republicans say deficit reduction, that will not come out of the pockets of billionaires. that will come out of the pockets of yours. they want to skew towards the wealthy at a $3.5 trillion cost

. they rely on economic fairy dust and fantastical growth numbers to claim the corporate giveaways will pay for themselves, a magical tale rebutted in this committee by republican and democratic witnesses alike. tax cuts simply do not pay for themselves. president biden's budget would reduce the deficit by ensuring big corporations can't get away with paying nothing and billionaires don't pay layer tax rates than teachers and firefighters. what end right off for corporations offering exorbitant compensation to executives and close loopholes from corporations that outsource jobs and shift profits offshore. it would make sure the irs could see to the wealthy and well-connected paid the taxes they owe. as we heard in testimony before this committee does investments save money and have a fiscal return as high as 12-1. unlike tax handouts, tax enforcement does pay for itself. fixing our corrupted billionaire cuddling tax code

is good for its own sake, but the revenue also can support investments of the american people and reduce the deficit. when the wealthy contribute a little more to medicare we can extend it and definitely as achieved by my medicare and social security fair share act. making sure the wealthy pay their fair share will protect social security and my bill does just that indefinitely and i look forward to working on these bills with the administration. republicans claim they no longer want to cut medicare and social security benefits. if that's true, the only other way to ensure long-term is making the wealthy chip in more. the biden budget is a proposal for how to reduce deficits by investing in our families of communities, by demanding the tax system be fair, and by actually enforcing our existing tax laws on the wealthy. deficit reduction the biden way leads to a declining debt to gdp

ratio, a sound marker of a responsible fiscal path creating a safe, prosperous, and fair nation. those are our values. house republicans would rather got programs and services to help their rich donors get even richer. which path we take is the choice that is before us today. i look forward to today mighty conversation on the president's budget. i now recognize my distinguished ranking members, senator grassley, and then we will turn to our witness, the officer management budget. senator padilla is obliged to this morning, so i will swap positions with him. he will have the opening round of questions and i will move to the end of the line and take his. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you, director young to give the position of the administration on the budget. today's hearing is doing what the budget committee is supposed to do.

budget issues. we've spent a great deal of time over the last two years on climate, abortion, lot of other issues. but this is what this committee should be doing so i complement the chairman for having a day of budget hearings. i was cautiously optimistic hearing president biden's call for bipartisanship and unity during his inaugural address, but boy, have i been disappointed. for three years, the president has embarked upon the far left agenda. he has taken a my way or highway approach to governing whether those who disagree with him are attacked as extremists. he topped that off last week with the most partisan state of

the union address i've ever heard, and i've heard a lot of those presidential state of the union's. a partisan president i find is so different from the partisan senator biden i worked with for 28 years in the united states senate. now comes his fourth budget offering more, same radical agenda. at the time we need real solution to put our fiscal house in order, this budget offers nothing but false promises and a far left. you know and we all know this would never pass even this congress. just a few years ago, this administration tried to claim that blowing up the deficit was fiscally responsible. in fact,

they said at that time higher interest rates would be a good thing. now our nation is barreling down the fiscal crisis that was started then. we are over $34 trillion in debt and still counting. even the president's media allies can't stomach his dishonest claims. cnn, for instance, called the president out, noting his policies in fact, "have had the overall effect of worsening the annual deficits, not reducing them." thanks to irresponsible policies , reckless spending, and decade high interest rates, service costs have more than doubled since 2021 according to the

congressional budget office. interest on debt will total $870 billion this year, exceeding what we expect to spend on national defense, the number one responsibility of the federal government. if that isn't daunting enough, then 10 years of social security is projected to go broke, putting benefits for over 50 million seniors at risk. now isn't this a sad political climate when a candidate trump and a president biden both say they are not going to cut social security benefits? what do they think is going to happen in 2033, just eight years down the road when we all know that if we don't do something about social security, everybody's benefits are going to go down to 77% of

what they are getting now? if there was ever a time for the president to show leadership with his budget, this is it. instead, he offers proposals so far out of the mainstream, most have already even been rejected by congressional democrats. even if all of the president's fantasy proposals were enacted, the budget still fails to rein in unprecedented deficits. under this budget publicly held debt as a share of the economy would rival the records set at the wake of world war ii. over the 10 years the president's budget racks up, a disaster of $16 trillion in cumulative deficits. and i think when i go to my counties to have q&a with constituents, which i do every year, not at every one of them

but at most of them they yell at the back of the room, "what are you going to do, grassley come about the national debt?" soon we are going to be asked what we are going to do with a $50 trillion national debt. that is despite proposing $5 trillion in new job killing tax hikes. that's in addition to a $2 trillion tax hike in store for families earning under $400,000. due to the president's shelving of the 2017 tax bill. how do you get around the fact the 2017 tax bill sun sets under budget law because you can't enact permanent law for more than 10 years without even a vote of congress? we are going to have the highest tax increase in history

of the country. now unwillingly the president's budget shows anyone who understands the fiscal situation knows there aren't enough rich people to tax -- to solve our budget woes, so i would remind the chairman that talked about taxing the rich that you can confiscate, not tax, but confiscate all of the wealth from the wealthy people in this country and you would run the government for just a few weeks or at most for a few months. there's just -- eventually you are taxing people who aren't rich to do everything that wants to be done. i think margaret thatcher said it best. the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. end quote. the president's budget is case and point and includes no

serious attempt to address ballooning autopilot spending that is the main driver of our record debt and deficits. moreover, it piles another $2.5 trillion in new mandatory spending, amounting to one of the largest expansions of the federal government in american history. now it is simple math. if you want to implement european size government, you will need to impose european-style taxes on everybody because that is what -- well, i can't think the across-the-board tax cuts they have for everybody that is similar to what we have. i'm sorry, i can't think of that word, but it is simple math. if you want european size government, you will need to impose european-style taxes meaning higher taxes and higher

prices for americans of all income levels. that's what this budget does. ironically, president biden likes to boast that our economy is doing better than europe's. that has been true nearly my entire lifetime. our economy does better than europe's because this country has always rejected the kind of big government tax and spend policies envisioned by the president copying europe. unfortunately when it comes to the president's budget, the president's proposals and congress disposes and i see congress wasting no time before disposing of this budget. if the other side disagrees with me, then i challenge them to set a date to mark this budget up. won't happen because even most democrats wouldn't vote for this calamity. unfortunately this budget is another lost opportunity for

the president to demonstrate leadership on pressing fiscal challenges, leadership that is desperately needed if we are ever going to climb out of a fiscal hole we dug ourselves into. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thanks very much. i now turn to our distinguished witness today to speak president biden's fiscal year 2025 budget request and she is director shalanda young of the office of management and budget. director young, we will hear your opening statement and at the conclusion of your opening statement i will recognize senator padilla to step in my place and i will swap and take his place further down the line to accommodate his responsibilities to preside the senate and the order will be senator padilla, ranking member grassley, marie, scott, senator warner, johnson, van hollen, kane, whitehouse, and

berkeley unless republicans appear. and with that, over to you, director young. >> members of the committee, when some people say they're happy to be here, they don't really mean it but i spent the majority of my adult career in this institution of congress, so even though it might be a rough morning for me, i am happy to be here and thank you for the chance to talk about the president's fourth budget. as you heard ranking member grassley say , from day one, this administration, president biden has tackled challenges head-on while delivering long- lasting results for the american people. over the past three years he has overseen a strong economic recovery, amassed one of the most successful legislative records in generations, grown the economy from the middle out and the bottom up and delivered important progress for the

american people. under the president's leadership we have added almost 15 million jobs. the unemployment rate has remained below 4% for over two years, a 50 year record. inflation has fallen by two- thirds. this administration has taken back lower cost for working families on everything from prescription drug costs and health insurance premiums to everyday goods and services and the president's top priority remains costs for the american people. at the same time, the president has restored u.s. leadership on the world stage while keeping americans safe and promoting democracy at home and abroad. the president has delivered this progress for the american people all while fulfilling his commitment to fiscal responsibility. the deficit is more than $1 trillion lower than when the president took office thanks in large part to a strong economic recovery. in addition the president has enacted another roughly $1 trillion in deficit savings over the next decade through the fiscal responsibility act.

the president's 2025 budget details the president's vision for equitable, prosperous, powerful america was proposals for responsible progrowth investments in the american people. the budget protects and builds on the progress made over the last three years and proposes additional policies to lower costs for working families including for health insurance, prescription drugs, child care, utilities, housing, college, and more. these investments will help working families keep their hard-earned paychecks and strengthen our economy. invest in american working families. the president has shown us we can be both fiscally responsible and invest in america. the budget will bolster manufacturing across the nation, make our communities healthier and safer, provide paid leave, deliver for our veterans, cut taxes for families with children, promoted dynamic workforce and

more. the budget protects medicare, social security programs generations of americans have counted on and seniors have paid into their entire working lives and extends medicare sullivan city indefinitely by requiring wealthy people to pay their fair share toward medicare and reducing prescription drug costs, and it reflects the president's commitment to reject any benefit cuts to social security. and asks the highest income americans to pay their fair share, improve financial security for seniors and people with disabilities and ensure americans can access the benefits they have earned. and in what would be a decisive decade for america and the world this budget reflects a national security strategy by including robust investments in military readiness, diplomatic and development tools, and honors a sacred commitment to our veterans. the budget achieves this while building on the president's proven record of fiscal responsibility and honoring the president's promised no one

earning less than $400,000 in this country each year will pay a penny more in new taxes. his budget reduces the deficit by roughly $3 trillion over 10 years on top of paying for all new investments in the budget. cracking down on fraud, cutting wasteful spending including reducing prescription drug costs and making the wealthy corporations pay their fair share. i want to thank the federal workers who have worked on this budget. my team with me, i want to thank the senators are being here and also your staff that did what you do for a long time in my career and i know this wouldn't happen without your hard work so i want to thank the teams who helped put this together today, so thank you. >> thank you, director young. standing in for me, senator padilla. >> thank you, mr. chair. i appreciate the consideration. first question, director young, how is the baby? >> the baby went quietly and

peacefully to daycare this morning so the baby could not be better. she knew i had someplace to be. >> in my time, there are two timely issues i would like to cover with you and i appreciate the call last week to begin the conversation on some of these. colleagues, household water and sewer bills have increased by more than 50% this last decade leaving one in three americans struggling to pay their bills. during the pandemic we actually had a very successful low income household water assistance program that was approved. 1.4 million households in 49 states, 5 u.s. territories, the district of columbia, and 97 tribal communities. i appreciate the administration's continued recognition of this successful program in the budget by allowing its continuation under like heap. until we can pass my legislation that would make it

permanent. so in the meantime we are providing -- the goal is to provide a separate long-term authorization of the program, but unfortunately in appropriating the funds, congress has failed to allow the administration has proposed in this previous budget request. director young, is the expansion of eligible users -- excuse me, uses to allow services factored into the $4.1 billion funding level proposed, was this budget to ensure both can provide assistance without the liheap program? can you speak to that and the appropriations bill? >> one, i helped get that bill started and it saved a lot of families from water cut off in the middle of the pandemic. how terrible would that have been if we hadn't done

something? we absolutely support the 2.7% and believe that would allow the lihwap program to continue without eating into the liheap program, which is incredibly important. >> we don't want to eat into one program because they both have significant merit and need , so i look forward to working with you on establishing the permanent program when the time comes. the other issue i wanted to raise is the -- well, let me just say, the call last week, i appreciate your recognition of the science when it comes to the sample return mission. for the first time in history, colleagues, we will launch a spacecraft from the surface of mars with samples for detailed study. this effort is being led by the incredible team at the jet laboratory in southern california. and as you know, congress was unequivocal in the

appropriations many of us and after last week in support of the mars sample return mission and in the larger survey process that determines nasa's funding priorities. director young, could you reiterate for the record the biden administration's commitment to supporting the independent review board assessment and the funding profile resulting from its conclusion? >> we are so committed to making decisions based on the internal assessment that we held off on providing a 25 number while the assessment is being done so we can put forward a 24 number because the appropriations bill asked us to take time and make sure we got that right and addition to the 25 number after that assessment is done to make sure we get it right. >> and can you remind us if nasa is on the same page with this commitment?

>> we are both on the same page when it comes to this commitment . we are waiting for the internal review at nasa to conclude. clearly one of the things we will look at is the long-term viability of the cost of the project. lots of missions nasa has to undertake but we are committed to following the science. >> thank you so much and in closing, mr. chair, i wanted to thank director young for the inclusion of $38.5 million for the river project to continue the important work safeguarding that historically underserved community in california and also for the increased funding for the international boundary and water commission. we have been working closely with your office to address the needs of critical infrastructure around the river. thank you. >> you know, we supported that in the supplemental as well. >> thank you. >> ranking member grassley followed by murray . >> president biden repeatedly claimed he wouldn't raise taxes

on anyone over $400,000. the president's budget includes $5 trillion in new tax hikes with much of that targeted at operation and businesses. targeted primarily at corporations. now i quote, or refer to the executive branch study. on its website, treasury office of tax analysis provides a distributional analysis for all taxes. that analysis shows households with incomes below $310,000 bear approximately 37% of the corporate tax under current law. using treasury's own analysis, isn't it accurate those earning under $400,000 would see their

tax burden increase at the very least by hundreds of billions of dollars just under the corporate tax proposal alone? >> senator grassley, i am happy to look at that analysis but we took a lot of time working with treasury to make sure none of our proposals impacted those making under $400,000. if the assumption is corporations will pass on any tax increases to hard-working americans, that is something we should all be concerned about but all of his proposals are focused on those people who make over $400,000 and frankly most of the tax proposals will hit those in the top 1% or 2% in the country. >> this estimate is by treasury and you said you worked with treasury, but they are giving you conflict in the views i quoted. we have data from the joint commission on taxation suggesting taxpayers under

$400,000 would shoulder more than half a president biden's corporate tax hike. i think you keep forgetting that corporations are nothing but a sheet of paper. they are management. they are employees. they are customers. everything that corporation pays is passed on to somebody else, so you've got to get over this. tax increases on corporations affect workers by 27%. i think -- 37% is what your own treasury department said. as part of his budget, president biden fails to include an extension of the 2017 tax law based on information supplied by the joint committee on taxation approximately 70% of the benefits of the tax law flows to taxpayers earning under $400,000. that equates to approximately $2 trillion tax hike on those earning under

$400,000, so i want to make an important point that not extending these tax cuts would be a direct violation of the president's pledge and -- and that. my next question is this, the nonpartisan congressional budget office has been providing congress with an independent analysis of the president's budget since the 1970s. in recent years, cbo hasn't been able to reestimate all of the proposals in the budget -- biden budget -- citing a lack of detail from the administration on several multibillion-dollar proposals. so would you commit to providing cbo with the necessary information it needs to provide congress with an independent assessment of all the policies in the president's

budget? >> congress absolutely needs cbo analysis. i've never heard this concern from cbo and i'm happy to take that back, senator grassley, but we will provide cbo with what they need to do this assessment . >> okay. my last question is the president's budget estimates making obama care subsidies permanent for hiring -- higher income earners will cost $273 billion over 10 years. this is a -- 67% higher than you estimated years ago. enrollment only explains half of this increase. obama subsidies are growing four times greater compared to total national health expenditure. can you explain this re- estimated increase in obama care subsidies to high income

earners and keeping in mind enrollment only explains only half of the increase. why do subsidies cost much more than overall healthcare costs? >> congressman, i want to thank the senators that supported extending the premiums for americans. we are proud of the fact enrollment has increased under the affordable care act and i'm happy to look at the analysis but the good news story here, more americans have access to healthcare through the affordable care act. some states pull back on medicaid and it is incredibly important we ensure americans have health insurance. it will cost us more in healthcare system if we do not have this critical program at this juncture. i am happy to look at the analysis you have but frankly the good news story, we have more americans covered under this law and we will continue to push to make these purine mediums permanent. >> you cannot explain the $110 billion in other words is what

you are telling me? >> enrollment is why the costs have gone up and i'm happy to work with your team to see with the difference in numbers are. i am not in the habit of answering analysis i haven't seen but i'm happy to check that back. >> chairman murray, followed by senator romney. >> thank you, chair. as i always say, a budget is a statement of values and president biden's budget tells working people and families very clearly and simply we have your back and we will be building a stronger future together. you just don't get a sharp contrast from president biden setting forward a budget that protects and strengthens medicare, medicaid, and social security while former president trump goes on tv to say he thinks you can, "do a lot in terms of cutting these programs." while the leader of the republican party wants to pull the rug out, president biden understands the source of our

nation's strength is our people and investing in working families does pay off in a major way. this budget offers a roadmap for progress on the housing crisis crunching americans' pocketbook and we are feeling this in my home state of washington. tackling the childcare crisis, like i have long championed, so working families can find the care they need for about $10 a day. tackling the climate crisis and rebuilding our nation's infrastructure, including funds for the howard hanson dam passion project in washington state which i thank you for.

>> that should not be too much to ask. there is never any good reason billionaires should be paying less than firefighters or teachers or nothing at all. director young, good to have you here today. thank you for all this work. as you well know, we passed the first of the fy 24 bills. in the agreement that accompanied that. those constraints made for a pretty tough funding decisions, as i said repeatedly. we did manage to hammer out serious bipartisan bills that protect key investments and we are now hard at work to pass the rest. in fy 25 we are facing in even

tougher set of constraints in the second year of caps and fewer adjustments to make use of from the outset. can you talk with us about how president budgets protects us on the non-defense side while working within those caps? what are the tools that you employed to make sure you're able to pass a strong set of funding bills within those caps? >> chair murray, thank you for what you did last week with the six bills. we are talking about veteran funding. we are talking about department of homeland security, childcare, pell grant. these are critical programs. the smallest amount we spend in the federal government. we often find ourselves struggling because we had to enact budget caps to make sure

these critical programs, both parties have historically supported. in this budget, because a lot of the debt deal had adjustments to make sure adequate funding could be had to make sure the 24 process could have been, this budget shows a path by using adjustments that have been historically used, like changes in mandatory programs, and emergency spending were necessary. congress has eased both of those tools in the past and appreciation -- appropriation bills. it will be needed to make sure that programs, nih and other places that have bipartisan support isn't cut unnecessarily. >> those are the same tools as in the approbation committee austere brits >> we will need more because most of the offsets are continued. we will have to do more

programs. emergency spending will be necessary. >> thank you. quickly, i want to thank you. you know how important that is to me. i always ask for your continued work with us as we continue to make sure critical funding is there. i want to thank you for the passage facility project. i'm glad the president heard me on how critical that is. i appreciate your work. >> thank you. >> senator rodney. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is appropriate that this is being held during the academy awards is inbred what we do here is more barbie than it is oppenheimer. the public thinks we work on the budget, but we don't. the time i've been in this committee, we have never met privately. we never come together and

negotiate and come up with a system to figure out how to get closer to a balanced budget. the only time we meet is in these hearings. if you have been watching over the 118th congress, you realize we had 28 hearings before today. do you know how many hearings have been on the budget? two. i'm concerned about the climate, but 14 of our hearings have been on climate change. for instance, the cost of oil dependency, how climate change is changing the insurance market. the real cost of fossil fuels. how the climate crisis threatens ocean industries. these are important topics. they just don't belong in the budget committee. this is a committee that is about performing. getting on stage and acting like we care about these things. there's no work being done by this committee to deal with our budget. and to deal with federal spending. now, we pretend -- we are going

to be bringing down the deficit. the administration is comparing our spending to the covid years. any american knows that we spend a massive amount of money to deal with the covid crisis and to help american families and pretending like we are cutting the deficit when we are comparing it to a covid year is absurd. people on both sides of the aisle, including economists, say the increase in debt is unsustainable. raising debt is a percent of the gdp cannot go on forever. we are apparently not in the position to do the job. we won't even meet to talk about it. my question is, does the administration support the idea brought forth by senator manchin and myself to put in place the bipartisan bicameral commission to look at ways to see if we can't hold the debt as a percent of the gdp.

do they support that? >> they passed a physical commission. >> do you think that is a good idea? >> it will take bipartisan solutions to deal with our fiscal path. we are putting a path forward here. i know you may not agree on our revenue proposal. >> but you see, in order to have a proposal that becomes law, it takes both sides to come together. i can put a proposal out there that i know has no chance of passing and pretend like i'm doing something responsible. the administration puts out a proposal. it knows it has no chance whatsoever of passing. we have republicans and democrats. we have to come together and work together, but we don't. look.

it is this sleight of hand. with all the things we are doing. we have a proposal that makes it work. you don't have a proposal that would actually get accomplished because you can't bring together both parties to do it. the sleight-of-hand -- the president said the other night that these wealthy billionaires pay only 8% in tax. well, what he didn't say was -- he wasn't talking about an income tax. he was very disingenuous. sleight-of-hand come again. academy award worthy. he is not talking about the income tax. he knows the income tax they pay is a lot. he's talking about putting in place a tax on the increase in value of their assets, so- called unrealized capital gains. i don't know of any country in the world that does that. do you? >> if i can, talk about this in a way, >> are there any countries in the world that taxes realized capital gains? >> if those gains are good enough to take to a bank -- >> i'm sorry.

i asked a different question. i'm hoping to get a response from you. i don't believe there is any country in the world that taxes assets for unrealized capital gains. i believe france tried it for a while and thought it was a disaster. they are only paying 8%. they're not paying 8% of their income. that is disingenuous. by the way, i think it is the stupidest idea i have ever heard. it would devastate our economy. i'm not worried about how much money the billionaires are paying in taxes. that's not my concern. it's the idea that we would transfer everything from the public markets to private assets that cannot be valued easily. the other proposals made, sounding as if they have a chance of passing. they don't. we need to work as a committee and as a congress to stop acting for the cameras, and

start working for the american people, to finally deal with the massive deficits and debt we have. that is not happening. that is why senator manchin and i proposed a bipartisan, bipartisan -- bicameral commission to douglas before it becomes a crisis. it can't be resolved with a calamity. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator romney. let me give the chair a minute to defend the committee on three points. we are operating for 2025. a bicameral by partisan agreement. second, a third of our total debt is produced by crises that we were warned of and didn't respond to. my god, if there is a crisis we are not responding to, it is climate change. i have no hesitancy to do that work. we got together with healthcare bipartisan solutions. i think the ticket to entry should be a proposal rather than just senators talking at

each other, but our last hearing was on that. i renewed the commitment. i renewed that commitment again right now. let us look at bipartisan ways we can reduce the cost of our healthcare spending in ways that do not cut benefits. >> i agree with you on climate change, but 14 of 28 hearings are on climate change? >> and the budget is under the rule of the bicameral bipartisan agreement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. what we are talking about is about the budget. it is about our values and where we want to invest as a country. i do think it is important to note that when we have a republican president, there is a different discussion about deficits. we all know that the $2 trillion in unpaid tax cuts to the wealthiest americans done under president trump put us in a situation or 25% of all the national debt of the country

ever, ever, ever created was in those four years. i didn't hear about it then. i think we should be extending. all of them with the debt. what i appreciate, director young, and i appreciate president biden for is your changing the paradigm. for years, we have heard about trickle down economics. let it trickle down. people in michigan are still waiting for it to trickle down. now, we have something different. it is actually working by the numbers pretty have to look at the facts. this president has said, grow the middle class. lower cost for people. grow the middle class. we'll see what happens here, coming out of the worst crisis we have had ever. covid and the mess that everyone was handed at that time. horrible situation for families, but also for a new president. coming out of all of this. so 3.5 years later, as my mom

would say, the proof is in the pudding. we got 15 million new jobs. 351 of those in michigan. we have unemployment below 4% for the longest stretch in 50 years. more small businesses are being created, which i love. i have to put a caveat and. it is led by black women entrepreneurs. i'm excited about all of what i see coming for small businesses, as well. i can go on and on in terms of what the numbers show us. we have not seen the crash that we keep hearing about from the other side. we are seeing growth. we are seeing costs beginning to come down. so i would want to first thank you for this budget because you are building on the progress that has been made of smart investments to grow the middle

class, and to ensure, frankly, that large corporations and the wealthy, pay more of their fair share. people in michigan think it is a good idea to see it happening. i appreciate that this budget invests in affordable childcare, helping people buy their first home. by the way, as a caveat, when i was in northern michigan, best year, talking to a coalition of 15 really terrific chambers of congress across northern michigan, their top two priorities were childcare, senator murray, and affordable housing. these are not radical socialists. most of these folks are probably registered republicans, and i love working with them, but their priorities were affordable childcare -- excuse me. affordable childcare and affordable housing is what they want us to work on, as folks in small communities across michigan. this budget cuts student debt,

lowers prescription drug cost. thank goodness. we would love to have bipartisan support for that. we had the first round. we didn't get any of our republican colleagues. it would be wonderful to get republican support for this. and restoring the child credit, which cut child poverty in half. thank you for that, and also, this proposal would reduce the deficit by $3.2 trillion while achieving long-term medicare solvency, without arming social security or medicare. i have a question. thank you for supporting so many things that michigan cares about. the great lakes restoration initiative. all of the things that are important for us in michigan.

growing our economy. we know that we work together, the biden administration, and in fact, it is wonderful bipartisan effort current behavioral health, funding and supporting healthcare above the neck as well is below the neck. we have made dramatic steps forward across the country right now to fund comprehensive certified community behavioral health clinics. strongly supported by communities in law enforcement. very bipartisan. in addition to increasing the investments, you have several other proposals to strengthen and improve access to behavioral health. i wonder if you might speak for a moment about this. this, too, out in the real world , certainly across michigan -- i know across the country, these are very important issues. >> thank you for all the points

you made. i could not have made them better. look, presidents budgets are to show a vision. those budgets are not picked up lock stop and past. the president should put forward how they believe the country should move forward. this president believes we have to keep investing in the american people. grow the economy for the middle class. gives working families a shot in this country. and we can do that through a fair tax code. but that also means we get to do stuff like behavioral health. not adding to the deficit, but having $3 trillion in savings in the deficit. we are proud of the behavioral health budget. $28 million in discretionary and mandatory resources across health and human services. 2.2 billion over 2023 spending. americans with private insurance and access to mental health and substance care.

the 988 crisis line, thank you all for helping to get that started. we need more resources to make that more robust. i don't think anyone here thinks we need to do less for suicide prevention in this country, for civilians and our veterans. this budget makes those commitments to the american people, and we do so in a fiscally responsible manner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator stabenow. mr. scott . senator scott. >> thank you. thank you for being here. so you work for a president that has a different vision of how you grow the economy. when i got elected in 2010, we were in the doldrums. we lost 800 jobs. we didn't balance the budget in

20 years. we were going into default for our debt. we balanced the budget point the first year, we balance the budget. what happened is even though we cut taxes and fees 100 times, the revenues skyrocketed, which gave us the ability to have record funding for education, transportation, and environment, the things that people care about. we stayed there and lived within our means. i want to do two things. here is the way the public looks at your budget and here is what is actually happening to the american public. first, since 2019, the population is up 2%. so your budget increases spending by 66%. that's a lot. the american public says, okay. what we get for that? 66% increase from the preparation being up 2%. if you look at the numbers, you are spending -- it's not yours -- it's president biden's, but spending $21,695. the average american income is 59,000.

you are expecting the american taxpayer to spend 36% of their income. 36% to pay for this budget. the increase per person and spending for every new person is $434,000. if you look at what has happened as a result of the deficits and the spending, look at what has happened to interest expense. in 2022, interest was actual, he projected 305. it ended up being 476 billion. so the projection right now is 965. so far, the projection out of the president's budget has been dramatically off. it's been dramatically low every year. even with that, even with that, let's say it's right, this year, interest expense will be in excess of medicare and defense.

so when anybody says they care about medicare, social security, when you see a budget that doesn't even come close to balancing, it doesn't make any sense, there is no money. there is not a dime in here to improve the social security trust fund. there is not one penny. any look and say, okay. this is biden's fourth year. let's see if it is working. the federal revenues are down 9%. that is not working. i cut taxes 100 times. my revenues went up. inflation -- inc. about it. both of us grew up and our families didn't have a lot of money. think about what is impacting families like ours. groceries are up 21% in three years. gases at 40%. shelter is up 20%. car payments are up 26%. the cost for a house as skyrocketed with what has happened with interest expense. median household income has gone from 77,800 to 74,755. it is down 5%.

so you look at it. inflation is up. the wages are down. we are projecting a corporate tax rate does not you. president biden predicted a budget of 23%. i cut taxes when i was governor because i wanted every company to come to florida. but we are telling people is, don't come to america. communist china has lower tax rates. if our tax rates are higher, were in a global economy. the company is going to go where the taxes are lower. and they should, whether we like it or not. now, let's look at jobs. in the last four months, we have lost 1.78 million full- time jobs. we've only added part-time jobs. we had advantage 9000 part-time jobs. look at the employment numbers that just came out. immigrants, legal and illegal, in the month of february, added 1 million jobs. people born in america lost 500,000 jobs.

i go back to florida, people don't think the economy is heading in the right direction. any look at that. debt to gdp. since joe biden took office, the debt has grown faster than gdp. and if you look at proposed budgets, the debt is going to continue to grow faster than gdp. how is this ever sustainable? you can't do that. you can do it in business. you can't do it personally. you can't do it as a country. i know you are working for somebody that has a different vision of the country than i do, but if you look at the numbers, the proposal that has been made by president biden has not worked for three solid years. what i hope is that at some point, it would change. but thank you for your hard work. >> would you care to respond, director? >> i just think one point worth

speaking on employment -- when he took office, 6.5% unemployment. 4% unemployment january 2024. so if we are looking at facts for nativeborn employment, which i hear is important and the senator brought up, i thought i was an important data point, that unemployment has come down by more than two percentage points it's the president took office. >> thank you. it is great to see you. i just heard senator marshall mention, down on -- unemployment was all covid. isn't it a fact that around the time the president was sworn in , economists across the board were projecting much deeper levels of unemployment and for longer than we have experienced? >> it took us nearly 5 years to get through the economic scarring of the great recession

. many of us lived through it in 2009. it was not a surety that we would come out of this pandemic with the strength that this economy has, and the president deserves credit -- thank you all for the american rescue plan. people should not assume that that was a given that the president could lead us so strongly out of the global pandemic. >> i appreciate that. the non-congressional budget office rejected unemployment rates in the united states would last at a higher level for a lot longer. as you say, because the american rescue plan, we were able to not only address the covid health crisis, but also address the economic fallout from that crisis, and unfortunately, we didn't have any help from any of our republican colleagues in

passing that. let me take a moment to think you and the president for some of the important priorities in the budget. for maryland, for example, continuing robust cleanup of the chesapeake bay, important support for nasa goddard, and a number of other priorities including the institute of health, which benefits all americans who have experienced health issues, which just about is every american family. i want to thank you for some of those priorities. i want to commend you on dealing with tax expenditures. tax expenditures are tax breaks for special interests don't have to pay the same rate or under the same rules as everyone else. it is essentially a handout through the tax system by creating special exceptions. i appreciate the fact that the president's budget goes after

some of these tax breaks. like a lot of the big tax breaks for the oil and gas industry. could you talk about why it is important that we have a fair tax system that doesn't include carveouts for special interests, and how that also helps provide investments for working families and reduces the deficit. >> look at our medicare proposal. by asking the wealthiest in this country to pay 1.2% more, by closing loopholes for people who have found ways not to pay medicare taxes, we can save the medicare program indefinitely. that is a small example. if you extrapolate to lots of different policies here, we can do for -- moore for middle- class working families .1 .2% for medicare. you know, you heard the president say, he's not trying to keep she will -- having two

boats instead of three by helping all americans. it goes on and on. in-kind contributions. all of those things ensure that we pay for every investment. we make sure that nih has the resources they need. we make sure we have a childcare program that is affordable. i pay childcare every month. i don't know how family stood, other than leaving children in places where they are nervous every day to leave their kids. the richest nation in the world. we can do better. and we can pay for that. we can pay for that. we can help families by having a fair tax code. >> i appreciate that. i would also point out that when it comes to medicare in addition to providing long-term stability through the mechanism you talked about, the president also said he wants to announce additional drugs that would be subject to negotiating.

i support the idea of bringing down those prescription drug costs for everybody. they did it for his insulin. in my remaining time, i was pleased to see the increase in resources for social security administration, which is based in maryland. can you talk for a minute about how stressed it is, how outdated the technology it is. we are not talking about the benefits side. they are talking about the administration side. >> we are talking about the benefits. if we want americans to access their benefits, we cannot continue to starve the social security administration of resources. that is what has happened. we have asked for an increase every year. we are frankly begging for your support to help fund this

agency. we cannot starve an agency of funding and then question why phone calls aren't getting answered. on our side, we have a new administrator in place. thank you all for making that happen. it is incredibly important to have confirmed leadership. but there is only so much more you can do with a lot less. they have been starved of resources for far too long. people should have their phone calls answered. we are doing all we can with what we have at social security, but we need the resources. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would observe that the social security administration is serving 50% more people than it was decades ago with less staff. >> senator, he should see the graph the administrator has. benefits, people needing benefits, and staffing. they cross each other in a troubling manner. it is going to get worse. >> senator johnson. followed by senator kaine.

>> welcome. miss young, dino what the dollar is worth today? >> i'm sure you will let me know, senator. >> it is a number you should know. it is worth $.85. that is driving a lot of the numbers on your budget here. it's causing an awful lot of pain for the american public. how to pick up where senator scott left off without asking questions. you take a look at what we were spending prior to the pandemic, $4.4 trillion. i personally think in 2020, we spent too much. we talked about the cares act. it was $750 billion. it got up to $2.2 trillion. it was not money spent very efficiently, but i think we to

do something fast. we had to do something massive so markets wouldn't collapse. after 2020, because we spent another $2 trillion in 2020, we had so much money sloshing around the economy, at most, i think were down 25 million jobs for a few months. within a few months, we were up to 8 million job losses, but come january 2021, again, so much money sloshing around. so much pent-up demand. those jobs will be coming back relatively soon. what do you think sparked the for your high inflation? >> senator, we can also talk about inflation that has come down by two thirds. >> what caused -- what sparked -- what sparked for your high inflation? >> most economists agree that coming out of a global pandemic, which is why we saw inflation across every major economy in this country -- it was the supply chain issues. economies turning back on, coming out of a once in a

generation pandemic. it is what you saw inflation across the globe increase. >> you don't think that too many -- chasing too many goods is the cause? you spend $2 trillion one year over the next, and then you don't readjust to baseline. how can you justify spending 4.4 trillion -- as senator scott was saying, it would go from 4.4 trillion to 6.5 -- 2021, president biden comes into office and we spent 6.8. and then 6.3. we haven't reset to the 2019 baseline. how are we ever going to recover from this? >> senator, we put forth a proposal, a way to continue to invest in the american people. if we think we have adequate childcare and paid leave in this country, i welcome us to talk to hard-working americans.

we can do that by asking the top one and 2% to add more into the system. that way, we cannot only pay for our investments, but we can bring down the deficit of $3 trillion. we can't just talk about spending as if it only hits those programs that hit working families in this country. >> i think it is a fantasy, if you make the rich pay their fair share point by the way, the top 1% pay about 40% of the income tax. at some point in time, you say, that's probably a fair share. i remember when a couple hundred billion dollars was like real money. the political process would be upset if you are running a couple billion dollar deficit. your plan to get us out of this -- you are running deficits of 1.8, 1.5, 1.5, 1.5, 1.6 -- it never comes down.

you are basically locking in at least $1.5 trillion deficits for the next 10 years. that is what you are budgeting. clearly, this is unsustainable. you don't worry about once again sparking massive inflation that further devalues the dollar from one dollar to 85 down to 70 to 60? >> senator, absolutely. that is why we put forth a plan that would actually bring the deficit down by 3 trillion. we care about our fiscal path. this president has shown how you can still invest in the american people and achieve deficit reduction. by the way, he worked with republicans to sign eight fiscal responsibility act that would save $1 trillion on our deficit. >> you are proud of a ten-year budget that never reduces the deficit, never brings it down

below 1.5 trillion? >> of course i'm proud of a budget that reduces the budget by $3 trillion that continues its investment in the american people. by the way, most economists would tell you that the way to look at our affordability of debt is to look at it as a percentage of gdp, as a percentage of gdp, deficits are below 4.5%. >> i don't think the average american takes a look at at least one trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see and think this is bringing down the deficit. that is fantasy talk. thank you. >> senator kaine, followed by senator marshall. >> good to be with you. budgets are not about numbers. they are about people. the u.s. economy has come out of covid stronger than any other economy in the world. jobs are up. on the planet is done. manufacturing jobs are up. inflation is coming down. people's 401(k)s are up. the rate of people who have insurance in this country is dramatically up. these are the measures i look at when i look at the budget and the economy. i don't see a competing economy in the world that has done with the u.s. has done.

we have exceeded our own expectations from the cbo and others, as senator van hollen stated. i want to dig into childcare with you. first, i really appreciate the president's budget has funding to save tangier island in the chesapeake bay. i asked you a question for the record. you heard about the president's willingness to fight sea level rise and promote coastal resilience and it includes funding that builds on funding we have received in the past. we want to see this island in the chesapeake bay that has lost 70% of its landmass. it is vulnerable to global climate change. it is funding for the healthcare needs is the mental health needs of our until -- health providers. there is a particular program that i have worked on

bipartisan that focuses upon the mental health needs of mental health providers, named after a physician and died by suicide in 2020. i will work with our colleagues to make sure we get that funding. you are under budget caps. let me ask you about one right now. the president sent us a supplemental that we passed in the senate by 872 29 vote for national security. one of the items in the supplemental was a significant investment -- we will work together with australia and the uk to work on deterrence in the pacific. we will eventually equip australia with the capacity to build their own subs and 2040. the president supports it. the budget that was sent up reduces funding for virginia

class subs. the president suggested in this budget that we would only build one per year to get to your commitment level where we can meet but we have committed to with australia. we have to get to 2.3. i view the 2 to 1 in this budget as an unfortunate backslide that is in cognitive dissonance with the presidents request that we fund the initiative. >> we felt it was important that when the president makes a deal, he sticks with the deal. but i don't need to know the president and i fully believe in the partnership with australia. we fund the equivalent of many submarines per year. it is not just funding the submarines. we have to invest in our

submarine industrial base. one thing i can ask you to do is to look at this in concert with the supplemental. we need that supplemental to move out of the house. not just for our partners, ukraine and israel and humanitarian assistance, but we don't talk about the submarine in the indo pacific park enough. that money is critical to not just building submarines, but building the base so when we ask for two, we can get two. right now, the industrial base is not sufficient and does not have enough capacity to do that. we need that supplemental to move in order to keep our agreement intact with aukus, and we look forward to working with you and others to make sure that aukus remains in place, that we get the

submarine money, and the industrial base rfid to produce more submarines point >> thank you. other colleagues have praised the presidents budget in the childcare area. i join that. so good for parents and kids and childcare workers. it is great for the economy. it will free up more people to come back in that are out of the economy now. last question is, how challenging is it for you to be six months into the fiscal year and not have appropriations bills done? >> the old staff director inmate is in the backseat, in trouble. i regret the late bills i may have worked on and did not fully appreciate how difficult it is to implement programs -- the efficiency -- just think about last friday. big fire drill. 4:00. is the senate going to pass this in time? activating -- a lot of people sing if we have to put stuff on hold. it is no way to run a government. we share your frustration. we want to look for ways -- speaking of bipartisan and

things we work together on, one is on the process question. i'm one of the believers that process -- good output can give us good product. we have to work on the process of the appropriations process. my guess is it is something i will think about and work on for the rest of my time working in this town. it is incredibly important. agencies depend on this. by the way, i like the annual process. i don't want to see the frustration do away with that. i think it is a good thing that congress looks at -- now it is 30% of programs every year. but unless we fix the process, that frustration is going to bubble up -- you see the problems with it. the threats of shutdown. >> you have many supporters on that point in the committee, including the chairman. i appreciate your service. thank you. >> thank you point >> senator marshall is next,

and then, depending on who is here, we have senators graham, warner, white house, and merkley. >> today, i'm here fighting for my grand children's future. for our grandchildren's future. they are going to have to live in a world where we are spending more money on interest and we do on medicare, on the military. because of our appetite -- are unclenched appetite for spending money. when their children are going through school, they need money for high-speed internet, for a strong military, because of the spending we are doing today, they will suffer the consequences of this interest. on to quote something that you have said and written as well, director young. the presidents budget reduces the deficit by $3 trillion over the next 10 years.

i think that is deceitful. i think it is disingenuous point you repeated here multiple times. you decreased it from what to what? you decreased it from $19-$16 trillion. only in washington, d.c. do you make the claim that increasing the cumulative deficit by $16 trillion is a decrease. at the end of the day, you are adding $16 trillion that my grandchildren will be paying interest on. i think it is disingenuous and i think the american public gets that. my first question, director young, how much money is the federal government going to spend this year? >> senator, the budget, as many slides have shown, is about $7 trillion. >> current fiscal year, we are going to spend about 7 trillion

and then 7 trillion in the next fiscal year. is that correct? >> senator, we haven't put out a budget for the next fiscal year, but if we are talking about baselines, if nothing changes, calendar year 24 at least will be at $7 trillion. this budget year, about 7.3 trillion. >> thank you. i would point out that over the last five years, government spending has gone up over 50% with no end in sight. next, i want to talk about budget deficits for a second. $2.8 trillion. we can blame that on covid if we want to. make sure it is the same graph i'm looking at. we continue with these budget deficits of approaching $2 trillion and perhaps more. i don't think anyone can argue that that is the future. and then we look at our national debt. of course, that we are going to add another $2 trillion to our national debt. that is at the end of the day, budgets be . i want to turn and ask a couple questions about ukraine funding. yesterday, politico reported that the department of defense

has sent $10 billion worth of weapons to ukraine that it does not have the money to replace. is that reporting accurate? >> senator, i think no one was officially quoted from the administration in the article. i have read the article. so i'm not going to comment on unauthorized or people who speak on the background. what i will say is if our ukraine supplemental pattern -- >> i understand that. is the funding accurate? >> if we had that ukraine funding -- >> i wish you would just answer my question, and not divert -- >> you are asking me questions based on unnamed sources. >> in reality, we didn't just send $113 billion dose there is a big difference between what these weapons we sent cost

versus the value of them today. in reality, this is not a question. in reality, we have sent them $121 billion, and you have said nothing to dispute that as being accurate. i want to go on. here is a question. is there any additional aid to ukraine in the absence of congressional action, yes or no? >> so, senator, we have to do the supplemental. >> i understand that is your opinion. we don't have to do anything. >> that is your opinion. we just try to answer my question? will it provide any additional aid to ukraine? >> senator, if we have additional replenishment funds -- >> so you're not going to answer your -- my question. >> if materials come in cheaper, then we thought, that would give us the room to maybe do another drawdown package. the department of defense goes in and buys agreement. >> let me ask you the question in a different way.

will it provide additional aid until congress passes the supplemental? >> senator, if we believe we can do that -- if we believed we could do that without affecting u.s. readiness in a detrimental way, we will. it is the presidents commitment that we will not let vladimir putin march through ukraine. >> we need to spend another 10 or $20 billion to replenish what we have given to ukraine. we didn't properly account for what we already sent them. i think we are 10 or $20 billion short. >> senator, we are worried about defense readiness. past the supplemental. >> thank you, senator marshall. >> senator merkley. >> you are familiar with the term greedflation.

in fortune magazine -- own to submit for the record -- an article entitled greedflation cost more than half of last year's inflation surge as corporate profits remain at an all-time high. can i submit that for the record? thank you very much. it points out that a big source of the inflation we have been dealing with is corporations doing huge price increases on products and having all-time high profits, which is a different explanation than we might have heard earlier in this hearing. and then, my colleague from utah was talking about unrealized gains. and we have in america a system of dynasty wealth protection and it works like this. if you have stocks and bonds and you hold them until death, then they receive what is called stepped-up basis, which

means they are never taxed for their increase in value, as you pass it onto the next generation. if you have property, it is even better. you solaun property and by another. you are never taxed on the gain. essentially, the wealthy investing in property proceed to never be taxed ever on their income from growing value of assets. is that not correct? >> that is correct. this budget does something about it. >> this dynasty wealth protection has resulted in the united states having the worst distribution of wealth -- the most inequality -- of any of the developed countries. i went through the chart and to give you a sense of this come in america, the top 1% own 40% of household wealth compared to

canada at 22% and japan at 10%. if you look at the top 10% in america, the top 10% own 80% of our household wealth, and in canada commits 50%. in japan, 40%. we have put laws in place that essentially create the very dynasty wealth that the founders warned us against as greeting and unequal society. is that right? >> we share your concerns, which is why this president speaks a lot about closing the wealth gap in this country. that is why we have real estate transactions. that is why we do a billionaire tax. most americans don't know about these ways to get around paying taxes. was people work, they get a paycheck, and they get taxed. >> my father was a mechanic. he said, why is it that in america, the laws mean that those who earn income by the sweat of their brow pay a higher tax than those who earn money through investments. in your budget, you have, for those with incomes over $100

million, a provision to help provide some tax on unrealized income. is that not correct? >> that is correct. >> well, hallelujah. it is the first time i've seen a real proposal coming from an administration to try to help tackle this challenge. our system is enormously beneficial to the already wealthy, making them more and more wealthy, while the burden is borne by ordinary americans. blue-collar americans like my parents, who strived to save in a system that is designed not to help ordinary americans but to help the very, very wealthy. i appreciate that effort. and i wanted to note that under the trump administration, you had, in 2020, 55 of the biggest companies in america made 40

billion -- let's see. had incomes over 40 billion. they paid zero in federal income taxes. these companies use a vast amount of our educational system because of the people they hire. a vast amount of our highway system for transportation. basically, at every stage, they have paid zero in texas. your effort, the biden administration, to have minimum corporate taxes, says that those who use these taxes need to pay some share toward it. that is the right thing to do, isn't it? >> it is. by the way, senator, we are on the path next to you and others who voted for the inflation reduction act -- we have, for the first time, a 15% minimum. that budget would take it from 15 to 21. >> that is a terrific improvement. thank you. >> thank you, senator merkley.

good to be with you, director young. >> i'm not used to you going last. >> well, wanted to let senator padilla go and do his duty on the senate floor. >> my medicare fair care act would implement the tax proposals in the budget and make sure that medicare can pay out 100% of benefits indefinitely. how with the medicare tax proposals in the biden budget usher this program's solvency in a fair and equitable manner? >> i talked about this a little bit earlier. thank you for your work on this proposal, senator. it not only helps the medicare program stay around indefinitely if we adopt, the prescription drug piece would ensure that seniors pay less, and the government pay less, and it helps with our deficit reduction. the presidents medicare proposal would ask those in the

top one and 2% to pay 1.2% more into medicare. also closes loopholes that the wealthy have found not to paid medicare tax in this country. it would expand our prescription drugs from the amount that are in law now due to inflation reduction act -- and frankly, these are commonsense things. if we want to do something about medicare solvency indefinitely, these are commonsense ways to go about it , and the president believes in them. this is her second time proposing these changes. >> and, relatedly, social security, according to the social security actuary, this medicare and social security fair share act would extend social security solvency indefinitely, also. and it would do so by making those earning above $400,000 contribute the same share that regular workers are obliged to for the first levels of income

it lifts the cap, essentially, and kicks it about $400,000. is that proposal in line with the principles that your budget aims to achieve? >> absolutely. you are the president speak about this on thursday. no benefit cuts on his watch, asking higher income earners to pay their fair share to make sure that social security is solvent. >> we had that moment in the previous state of the union, when the president talked about republicans who wanted medicare and social security cuts, and they all rose, and he unanimous opprobrium to say, no, no, no, we don't do that. we had this unanimity movement about social security and medicare cuts. of course, that was based in fact. we had members of this committee say that they want to take social security and put up by the roots and get rid of it. that is hardly in opposition to benefit cuts. just this week, former president said that as part of his campaign, he was looking at

cuts to social security and medicare. it is really important that we get this done now, while we have the ability to do this under president biden. otherwise, all the signs are that there will be cuts to social security and medicare. let's look about healthcare savings. there is an enormous healthcare issue in the budget. we have done a lot of good work to prove, in real practice that you can save on healthcare costs without cutting healthcare benefits. things like value-based care have shown that when you work with us to continue to develop proposals, for savings in the federal health care -- that do not touch benefits. >> absolutely, senator. we have to bring down

healthcare costs. we have seen improvements since the affordable care act was passed. we also know what the cost to the american people -- the government spending -- what that is, if we don't do all we can to bring down the cost of healthcare. we know, also, it costs a lot for uninsured populations to exist. i'm proud of the increased enrollment in the affordable care act, but we pledged to work with you to make sure that we are using every tool at our disposal to bring down healthcare costs. >> we have seen in rhode island, two of the best performing organizations in the country, the cost of care per patient is going down. the happiness and joy per patient, if you will, going up. they love the additional services that they get that help bring the cost down. and of course, healthcare outcomes improve. that is the path i intend to follow. let me ask. one final point, and then i

will turn to sender loudon. it provides services to crime victims like shelters, transportation, and very often for victims of domestic violence, and to support them seeking medical and mental health care that victims so often require after the aftermath of a crime. director young, the president proposed a plan for appropriations to help support the fund over the next five years. why are those appropriations so important for us to maintain our support for victims of crime? >> you know this is incredibly personally important to the

present. it would deposit about 1.35 million. we have a proposal to restore the crime victims fund so that funding for victims can be maintained in a sustainable, predictable manner over the next decade. we would love to work with you on that proposal to make sure that the cvf has the funding these victims need. >> thank you. ses, quote, the budget recommends continuing the affordable connectivity program through december 2024. the budget also promises, quote, the administration will work with congress to secure this in 2025 and beyond. if congress allows the affordable conductivity program to lapse, would it abruptly cut conductivity for millions of low income families eliminating access to work, education, and healthcare? >> yes.

millions. >> i have been proud to work with colleagues in the house and senate to move towards incorporating the acp to the universal service fund to ensure long-term stability and improve effectiveness. will you commit to working with me to secure additional funding for the affordable conductivity program not just in 2024 but 2025 and beyond? >> absolutely. i will work very hard. you heard us talking about the ukraine supplemental. the president has also last for $6 billion for this critical broadband conductivity program and we hope that millions of americans will not lose access. >> i appreciate that very much. the mental health behavior system in the united states has been pushed to its breaking point. i was just speaking with some mayors in the nation's capital with the league of cities. they heard from the president yesterday. over the past 25 years, new

mexico has had the highest alcohol-related drug-induced death rates in the nation. 'm the consequences of drug use continue to burden new mexico communities. this is something that we have heard day in and day out from our mayors. these families impacted by substance use and also across different communities that are especially highly at risk for overdose. this includes pregnant, postpartum women and their families. those who experience housing instability or seeking services for addiction to opioids, alcohol or poly substance use disorder. director, why is it important to fund evidence-based harm reduction prevention treatment for substance use disorder for all americans? >> there is a reason this is prioritizing the president's budget. we have seen american

family, their story about e substance use disorder and what it has done in the generational harm it can cause is absolutely critical just like any other healthcare disorder that we have resources needed. we have to be sure these companies cover mental health and substance use disorder like any other ailment that might befall someone in a physical nature. we take this seriously. i have been heartened by the bipartisan interest in doing something about this. it will take both parties coming together. one more thing. we have not talked about it a lot today. also stopping the flow of these dangerous drugs coming across the border. part of the supplemental request that remains stuck is putting equipment in the ports of entry to be sure we can stop fentanyl crossing the borders. >> if i could interject for one second. we have some procedural

business we will restart the clock at one minute 30 but he has kindly agreed or at least half has agreed for him to gavel the rest of the hearing. have to get back to a judicial report. let me just conclude by thanking director young very much for her testimony today and for a budget we can all support and be proud of. with that, back to the senator for his time. c >> thank you. >> think you, mr. chairman. i very much appreciate the response. the one thing i will complement, there's many compliments that i have but one of his responsibilities also is chairingal narcotics group of u as well. in the one area, director young, i believe also needs more attention is looking at illicit financial market. these cartels and bad folks see this as a

business. there's a lot of money moving around the country. i just do not hear a lot and that particular space. look forward to working with your office and others to be sure we are able to put a dent in there as well. i appreciate the continued support for the department of energy, but i am concerned that the modest additional investments are not enough to solve the scientific challenges. for example, we must increase our nation security at the same time addressing the climate crisis. i meet regularly with scientists and leaderships across the premier national laboratory system including two and new mexico. los alamos. i know that they are eager to help the nation and the world solve the climate crisis. the president and congress need to provide the resources to get

the job done. director young, as you know, on his first day of office president biden committed to reaching a net zero emission economy. this requires massive reinvestment in the national labs. can i get a commitment from you today to work with me and my colleagues to rent -- increase r&d investments to the level needed to tackle the crisis. >> senator, you have my commitment to doing that. the budget contains $10.7 billion for labs. i understand more is needed. this is the last year budget caps. i'm committed to working with you. the president understands how vital the national labs are to the climate fight to reaching net zero carbon by 2050. you absolutely -- we want to continue the partnership to be sure that the labs are robustly funded to meet the moment. >> i appreciate that. i have other questions into the record. i just want to close saying

thank you to you and to your team. most recently the senate took a historic vote on the radiation exposure act amendments.si 69 senators voted in favor of addressing this in orton policyo . the statement of policy that we received from the president to the united states had to be reviewed by your team extensively. i just want to say thank you. i know that the families across america who will benefit from this program would also like to say thank you. with that i will yield my time. >> thank you. i recognize senator braun. i can't get over be in the staff director. i am very sorry. >> thank you for getting recognized from the witness and the sitting in senator. looks like i am the last senator standing. we have had a lot of interesting discussions about the health of the federal government and financial trajectory.

i have a question for you because a lot of the facts and years i think have already been covered by other senators. do you think a balanced budget amendment or statute would be helpful to keep both sides of the aisle in a place where they would have to do that simple thing? so they don't borrow from our kids and grandkids. i know everybody has great ideas and intentions, but it looks like the major muscle over the last -- probably since the bush administration it has been both sides of the aisle. that goes back to 2000. we are entering into three decades of it soon. where are you on a balanced budget amendment or statute? >> senator, one, you are always thoughtful about these things and thank you for the way we approach them. i know we have a lot of disagreements but you are honest about this. my concern about the type of amendment is what it would do to programs like social

security and medicare. i do believe it is going to take bipartisan solutions. i know senator romney talked about a commission. our concerns will always lie in what will dramatic cuts due to the benefits of programs. i think about my 95-year-old grandmother. if we did that, what happens? what is her source of income stability? if we pull back dramatically inw that fashion on social security and medicare that is my concern. >> what about the crowding out effect more and more interest every year to do that. do you think we will ever get as to a point -- i know that is assuming that that stuff can get done but it does not tamper with economic growth. i think with some of the stuff in 2017 which you probably

disagree with. is it a point, i think it is called the modern monetary theory where this debt does not make any difference anymore. do you believe that? >> i believe that we need as a % of gdp don't make our debt unsustainable. we need to be sure it stays well below 2%. deficits in the long run are about 4 1/2%. most economists believe those levels make our debt manageable. we agree on the need to manage our fiscal house. but we think nominal numbers tell one story. the more complex story is looking at a lot of these things as a shared

gdp. >> i think the only country that has taken that more to the limit is japan. that is in terms of how it is growing. going 50 years back we have never other than two years generated revenues regardless of the tax rate. you raise taxes, flush a little more into the treasury. you start to lose economic growth over time. if you lowered taxes you take a little bit away from the treasury. pre-covid it was about ready to say that we were revenue neutral on the tax cut and jobs act. of course, all the wheels fell off. at some point we've got to not defy statistics to keep social security healthy. medicare,

medicaid, defend our country. the mandatory spending is driving everything structurally. it sounds like you are willing to live with never reducing principal, keep growing debt as long as a percentage of interest is not swamp the deck.t >> i think the way to measure these things from a sustainable standpoint is a look at interest as a % of gdp and look at deficit as a share of gdp. i do not it is saying the principal should never be paid down. also i'm a believer revenue was a story to tell in this. i do believe, especially with irs investment that we have, that there is a different story we should be telling about

bringing revenues in. the last time we had a surplus in 2001, we had revenue higher as a percentage. >> a couple years out of the last 50. i want to be sure you don't try to generalize that because it has been hard to attain. the other thing i want to point out is with the economy as it has been constructed over the last three years, i make the contention that government has benefited most. the only part of the economy that actually brings prices down, enables you to raise wages would be for more business investment. government is another form of consumption. we are in a consumer driven economy based on borrowing, spending as opposed to spending and saving. i am about out of time here even though i am the last senator. we are not going to get to any agreement there. o i would like to put it on a record. i think we are headed in a direction that we have never been there before in the

history of the country. coming out of world war ii the last time he had government as a percentage where it is at now. we are not in a war. we were savers and investors. we paid it off to where we almost had no debt, built the interstate highway system. a lot of what you want to do through government i do not think would be sustainable when we do not put more discipline into the configuration. i think a lot of things you talked about are in jeopardy because we just cannot go in time and the facts and figures say we've never generated or than 18% of our gdp and federal revenues with federal government taking government up to 25% higher than it was pre- covid and we are not involved in a war. think about that.

i think the country in the long run is going to be going through some really tough times living beyond our means. >> think you. >> senator graham, you are recognized. >> think you. i will not task you any restaurants. i'm just going to make a statement. we have problems with the budget and taxes and spending, but one thing about this budget that i think is not just unique to president biden. the defense side of the budget is the result of a deal negotiated. i just want the american people to understand from my point of view for whatever it's worth i have never seen this many threats at once. according to the fbi director wherever you look you see blinking red lights.

isis is coming back. we have a land war in europe everybody is running out of ammunition. russia is out producing the west. you have is real in a fight for its life. the needs to arm our allies is the greatest i have ever seen it. literally, we are having to scramble to meet reduction needs. hopefully the aid package will get out of the house. our ability to deter bad actors has completely gone away. there is no way to explain what is going on in the world other ch than people believe that america is no longer a worthy opponent after the withdraw from f mist and -- afghanistan. it's not only led to the rise of isis which has led to a threat to us, broken border, on and on, you see bad actors, 21

taliban take over afghanistan, 22 russia attacks ukraine, 23 hamas attacks israel, 24 american soldiers killed in jordan of all places. the world is literally on fire. our defense budget being presented by the administration would take us to the lowest percentage of gdp spent on defense, like, forever. in world war ii 47% of gdp was spent on defense because we were in a fight of our lives. it was a horrible time and that generation rose to the occasion. 14% of gdp during the korean war . the peak of the cold war about 9% trying to make sure we stood up to the soviet union. september 10, 2001 the day before 9/11 we were at 2.9

during the global war on terror the peak was 4.7 gdp spent on defense. this budget in 2025 will be 3.2% . by 2034 we will be spending 2.4% gross domestic product on defense. that makes zero sense. given what is going on in the world. everybody worries about china. we ought to. our navy under this budget goes from 298 ships to i think 292. the need for a navy according to combat china and other threats would be hundred 50 ships so we are going backwards. what would it take to get to 450 man tendon man ships? 5% above inflation for a decade. we are spending below inflation. we are actually cutting into

the bone. the number one job and goal of the federal government is to defend the nation. we now have a defense budget enacted that would be two point 4% negative growth. ms. young, this is not your doing. this was negotiated by other people, of all the times i've been here and i've been here for a while, i have never seen both parties lose its edge when it comes to making sure the defense department has the resources to deal with increasing threats. this budget agreement has put us on track to have the lowest spending on defense in modern history at a time the world is literally on fire. i will do

everything i can to turn the trend around. the supplemental has money not only for israel, taiwan, and ukraine, it has money for our own defense needs. i am insistent we pass that budget. hopefully we can find a way to get it out of the house. i keep trying with the don interest forgivable loan that may be the key but this budget is not only inadequate it puts us on a pathway to reduce our capabilities when all a be adversaries are increasing their capabilities. a nightmare in the making. thank you. >> i want to thank director young for appearing before the committee today. questions for the record are dubai 12:00 noon tomorrow. we ask director young to

respond to her questions within seven days of receipt. the hearing is adjourned. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. that is bipartisanship. [inaudible conversations]

>>ht, president biand first lady jill biden host estate dinner honoring the japanese prime minister.

at 11:00 p.m. eastern on c-span we will feature highlights from the evening including the prime minister's arrival and toasts given at the dinner. you can also watch online at c- span.org or the free video app. the house is now planning to send impeachment articles against homeland security secretary may orchis to the chamber next week. sevel senate republicans requested the delay to have the chamber conduct a full trial instead of the democrat plan to fully dismiss the charges. life coverage online at c- span.org. get contact information for members of government right in the palm of your hand when you preorder your copy of c-span's 2024 congressional directory with contact information for every house and senate member