>> just say yes. >> yeah, we are actively asking them to support our budget and we -- i announced that i'll be supporting the a well. >> all right. thank you all very much. we just heard from the republican study committee. they unveiled their budget plan today. which includes more spending cuts than the house budget committee proposal which comes to the floor tomorrow. that resolution calls for $3.5 trillion in spending. and projects $2.9 trillion in

revenue. democrats are opposed to the measure because of cuts to domestic spending and tax cuts that they say would benefit the wealthy. you can see live house coverage on c-span. follow c-span's local content vehicles throughout the weekend as book tv and american history tv explore the histo rock, arkansas. saturday, starting at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2. author griff stockley on the little known riots and killing of at least 20 african-american sharecroppers. >> you had calls going all up and down the mississippi delta. and saying that blacks were now in revolt. and the next morning between 600 and 1,000 men, white men, pour into philips county to begin

shooting down blacks. >> and on american history tv on c-span3, sunday at 5:00 p.m., former student bruce lindsey on integration and north little rock h th know what's going to happen, but we don't know what's going to happen. we don't realize what's going to happen when we get up those steps. but they seem to because the crowd is with us now. the momentum is behind us, and they are pushing up us the steps. >> these stories and others from c-span's local content vehicles in little rock, this weekend on c-span 2 and 3. house budget committee chairman paul ryan awn veiled the republican budget plan last week. budget committee members debated the measure and voted on line by line changes to the legislation in a process known as marking up the bill. the full house will debate the measure tomorrow.

>> the committee will now come to order. we will proceed with consideration of the fiscal year 2013 concurrent resolution on the budget. i want to begin by thanking the ranking member for working with me structure for this mark-up that closely follows what we had done in the past on this committee. our goal is to ensure that we have an orderly mark-up. we have a long day ahead of us, and i thank everyone for their cooperation and, yes, we will be serving dinner at dinnertime. under the structure we have developed, we will begin by having presentations on the budget and our control by the jo the minority. i want to make an opening statement and then mr. van holland will make his opening

statement after which the majority will use the remaining time left in its hour and then the minority will use the remaining time left in its hour. next, we will have a staff walk-through in which members can ask questions that they may have with trop the chairman's mark. after the staff walk-through, we will proceed with amendments. i think we 30, with the structure that we've worked out with the ranking member. i will describe that process in more detail when we get to the amendment process. most members are not familiar thtiring. tiers thi point, before makingr opening statements, i would liky have. >> thank you, mr. chairman. n't this particular moment other welcome again all the members on what is going to be alogoing to- a big debate today. and if the this

committee is an indication, i think we will be pois in a way clear and draw contrasts but do so in a civil way. why don't we get on with business? >> absolutely. for 2013 s good. budget to be here with my house budget committee colleagues and i'm proud of all the work they have put into this. people ran for congress to save this country from a debt crisis. to save it for their children and grandchildren. and the member of this committee have been tire unless their advoes of that end. i also want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the hollen and his staff for their cooperation and preparation for today. throughout this process, you have shown a commitment to mutual respect and openness in keep this committee. i want to thank you for that, chris. one year ago, we camemmittee toe

the fy 2012 house passed budget. t the time, i called it just a prosperity. and we still have a long ways to go. but look at how far we've come si changed the conversation in washington abou. some courageous democrats joined us in this conversation over the and bipartisan opposition to the path of broken growing. this year, we take another step on the path to prosperity. one that builds in our important work last year while taking several new strides toward a more prosperous nation. the facts are these. for years, both political parties, republicans and democrats have made empty promises to the american people. unfortunately, the president refuses to t debt-fueled economic crisis before us. instead, his policies put us on a path to debt and decline.

we reject the broken promises of the past. the american people deserve real solutions and honest lelivering our budget. house republicans are advanng a renewal. i want to take people's attention to the charts. it's very clear that absent action, government spending and health retirement programs will soon grow to consume every dollar of revenue that the government raises in taxes. we can't avert a debt crisis without dealing with these programs. the fiscal gap. the government's fiscal gap promises that government is making to future retirees for which it has no way to pay is growing by trillions of dollars every year. each year that congress fails to act, the u.s. government gets closer to breaking promises to current retirees while adding to a growing pile of empty promises

to future generations. this is taken out of the president's budget itself. by its own admission, the president's budget does nothing to avert this path of broken promises. in his own words in its own words, the budget allows the nation to, quote, fiscal position to deteriorate. if we stay on the current path, government spending and the size of government will skyrocket to record levels that a free economy simply cannot sustain. if we choose the path of prosperity, government can remain limited. our budget cuts over $5.3 trillion in spending relative to the president's budget. and it returns spending as a share of the economy to its historical norm of 20% by 2015. take a look at deficits. if we continue upon our current path, deficits literally spiral

out of control. if we choose this path to prosperity, our budget keeps boring no check and puts us on a path to balance. if we stay on the current path, this is the future that awaits us. a debt crisis where we know we will sacrifice our current economy and our children's future. it's a path that is accelerated by's president's budget. we are headed toward a debt-fueled economic crisis. and the president's own budget admits this by saying that their budget allows the fiscal position to deteriorate. if we choose the path to prosperity, we can lift this crushing burden of debt. our budget puts the nation's finances on a path to balance and ultimately on a path to pay off the debt, never letting the debt get up to those levels which can compromise our economy

and short change the next generation. my colleagues on the house budget committee were instrumental in laying out this path to prosperity. at its core, this is a plan of action about putting an end to the empty promises from a bankrupt government and restoring the fundamental american promise ensuring our children have more opportunity and inherit a stronger america tga us. it is time for us to get to ann people to put an end to empty promises and to choose prosperity. at the end of the day we haveha make. what kind of country do we want? what kind of people do we want to be? our budget is our answer to this question. we want a country that is prosperous, strong, secure and free. and, most of all, we want people to fulfill our founding

vision. a free people with the opportunie happiness for ourselves and our children. with that, i will reserve and yield to mr. val hollen for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think we all we gather today to consider a long-term budget plan at an especially consequential moment for our country. unfortunately, this republican budget makes the wrong choices for america. up a slide now that shows the current jobs situation where we've come wre slide shows is that as a result of the extraordinary actions that have been taken over the last few years and many different decisions made by the president and the previous congress, america avoided a second great depression and is now emerging from the ravages of a financial meltdown and near

economic collapse. this chart is very vivid and very clear. what it shows is the day the president was sworn in, we were losing jobs in this country at the rate of 800,000 per month. gdp was collapsing. negative 8% of growth. soon thereafter, congress and the president took action. we stopped the free-fall and we've been climbing out of that. we've now had over 23 months of sustained private sector job growth overion jobs created. we need to sustain that growth. and our top priority has to be to make sure that we nurture that fragile recovery. it's clear that putting americans back to work is the fastest and most effective way to reduce the deficit in the short term. in fact, the congressional

budget office estimates that our weak economy and underemployment is the major single contributing factor to the deficit accounting for over one-third of the pr fiscal jobs plan and the president's budget and the budget that we will propose as an alternative next week make key investments in areas of our economy that will help spur job creation now and ensure our success in the long term. it calls for initiatives to help modernize our roads, our bridges, our schools, and when you have an unemployment rate in the constructi over 17%, that is a win, win for the in addition, the president's plan and our plan will not expand incentives to ship american jobs overseas as this republican budget does, but it

will invest in jobs here at home so we can make it in america. in addition to helping small businesses put workers back to work, our budget will m strategic long-term national interests to outinnovate and outcompete the rest of the world. investments essential for long-term economic growth and maintain our competitive edge. now long-term economic growth also rui a plan now to predictably reduce our deficits and debt. and mr. chairman, the issue is not whether we enact a plan to reduce the deficit. it's how we do it. it's the choices we make. to govern is to choose and the choices made in the republican budget are simply wrong for america. it is not bold to provide tax breaks to millionaires while ending the medicare guarantee for seniors and sticking seniors with a bill for rising healthit

tax giveaways to big oil coie interests while slashing investments in our kids' education, scientific research and critical infrastructure. it's notwa corporations that ship american jobs terminating the affordable care act provides affordable care to tens of millions of americans. and it is certainly not brave t fund their pet initiatives and an effort to cut support for seniors in nursing homes and individuals with disabilities and low-income kids. and it is not fair to raise taxes on middle income americans to pay for another round of tax breaks for the very, very wealthy. and yet those are the choices that are made in this republican budget. where is the shared responsibility? we have american men and women

3u9ing the i putting their lives while others hide their income in the c and refuse to pay their fair share. any responsible effort to balan approach that addresses both spending and revenue and the republican budget fails that simple test. probably not a surprise since 98% of house republicans have signed a pledge refusing to close a single special interest tax loophole or single subsidy for big oil company for the purpose of deficit reduction. in keep with that pledge, the republican budget rigs the rules of the game in favor of the very wealthy and in favor of powerful special interest, and it does so at the expense of middle income americans and at the expense of

seniors. in addition to locking in that portion of the bushcuts t, that benefits the very wealthy, this republican budget proposes another tax windfall for twealt. combined on average they will get $150,000 tax break for millionaire. because by cutting the top rate from 35% to25% generates an income loss of about $5 trillion based on joint taxtites. and you have to make up that $5 trillion loss if you are going to do this in what you say is a. as we will show later, youncinte super wealat middle income americans. in fact, i'd like to now art pu ofs is done in service to

what has been a proven failure of an idology. trickle down economics. the notion that somehow when you provide tax breaks to folks at the very top, it's going to trickle down and boost everybody else in this economy. we've been there. we tried it. it was called the eight years of the bush administration. what happened at the end of those eight years was a net loss in private sector jobs. but what also you see is that little uploop after those tax cuts. you saw a huge increase in after-tax income of the top 1%. so it was a rising tax break. didn't lift all boats. lifted the yachts but it didn't lift anybody else. and so what are the consequences of not asking for shared responsity means everybody else everybody else has to bear the burden ofreduction.

and it means we have to compromise important investments to help our economy grow stronger. now we understand you've g toug. in the budget control act we've cut a trillion dollars. in fact, we cut the amount of discretionary spending recommended by the bipartisan simpson/bowles css proposes is another trillion dollars in nondefense discretionary spending. and that will simply devastate important investments. and you don't even show where you're going to get those cuts. you just put a big pool at the bottom of your budget them withe consequences of that. now our country has become an economic beuse we work togethere those important investments like the gi bill, like the interstate highway system. and by gutting those investments, you are prescribing a recipe for national decline. now let me turn to the question

of health care. every member of this committee rising health care costs represent a huge challenge for the federal budget. but we've also sat through a lot of hearings where we know that the per beneficiary increase in cost in the medicare program over time has actually been less than the increase in per beneficiary costs in the private insurance market. t not a solution to say to people, we're going to put you into the private market. and it's very clear that if you do that, what you're going to end up doing is rationing careb. now, the affordable care act took a number of measures to t s throughout the health care system. you repeal that, at a time you say you repeal it you said you're going to come goi to make sure no one's denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, you've got a bill that says you're going to find a way to lower

health care seen that bill yet. you're getting rid of something that provides care to tens of million, we haven't seen the other bill yet. this doesn't reform medicare, it deforms it. let mee despite claims the market competition will curbhelan here t oar the coucher or premium support, whatever you want to call it. now, our republican friends have said, it's just like part d, the prescription drug plan in medicare. it's not. there's no cap in part d. you said, it's like the federal employ either. there is no cap on the amount of premium support given tomb and yet you're prescribing for folks on medicare a plan that is -- provides that cap which will transfer costs to them,

transfer costs that you don't take the risk of transferring to other member finally, you rip apart the safety net with respect to medicaid. i mean, this is an area of the budget that you whack to the tawn of $800 billion, about one-third of the medicaid budget. by the tenth year. and mr. chairman, to say that you're doing that in order to repair, as this thing says, to repair the services safety net, i think people are going to be hard-pressed to understand how cutting it by one-third, a program we all know is already underfunded, is somehow repairing it. just say that this budget, it doesn'toesn't be in 20 years. and when you look at the out ye important that members keep in y clearly in the letter they sent to the chairman, that it's not

based on a cbo analysis of policies that are in this plan. it's notact, b'm just going to exactly from cbo letter so we all understand. it says, those calculations, meaning those in the cbo reporte for legislation or analysis of the effects of any given policies. has not considered whe specified paths are consistent with the policyes released today chairman ryan as part of his budget resolution. they are based on the figures specified by the chairman and his staff. and i'm going to close with this point, mr. chairman. as you start to look years, 2030, 2040, 2050, you look at that chart that we always see, i just want members to understand that when cbo says that it will decline all they're being given is numbers from the

republican staff and say, plug this in as an assumption. every member of the committee could do that. they're not based on an analysis of specific policy changes that are being recommended and how those policy changes. so i hope, mr. chairman, that a understand the impact of those policy changes and come up with a bipartisan approach at the end of the day, whether it's this year or some point in the future. and again, i thank the committee for its time. i will simply say for the record, as the gentleman knows, cbo doesn't score budget resoluti resolutions, that's always been the case. so that's what you have to do in order to get your deficit path followed. here's how we intend to operate on our side of the aisle. we're going to divide up our time for our 60 minutes. we have 50 minutes left. a little bit more. mr. price, mr. ice, mr. riddle,.

garrett will each control 10 minutes on our sideent, then weo to the minority side for them to handle however you choose to distribute it. at this time i would like mulvaneny. good way to start hairman, today is get into the details what was we're going to be discussing, to try to a compar between what we'll be offering on the republican side, what our colleagues on the other side have offered in the past, offering over the course of the next couple of days. two contrasts. contrast what we had done as republicans versus what the senate democ but of course they haven't done a budget in three years so there's not possible actually to do that the senate democrats are following on the lead set by this committee when it was last under democrat control when it also failed to offer a budget during the last year the democrats were in charge of this committee. that leaves us only with the president's budget with whichrtn what we're ri off recognize

what jumps out at you first when you look at the president's budget is the $1.9 trillion in brand new taxes. more taxes on income. more taxes on gasoline. more taxes on giving gifts to other people. an offensively to many folks in this coy, taxes on dying. what else jumpth out is the additional spending. $1.5 trillion of new spendinges. more spending on welfare. more spending on paying peopl and more spending on of all presumably i would suppose to corporations that have given large financial contributions to the particular administration. in fact, if you wanted to sum up the president's budget, the one that we're trying to provide the contrast to here today, iul fas language that used to be fashionable in this town, it's a tax and spend document.

that's what it does. it raises taxes and it taxes and raises spending. i wasn't around during tho is t some time during the late '90s, the previous democratic administration, the clinton administration, made it no longer fashionable to use the words tax and spend liberal and perhaps with good purpose. we've seen some of the things accomplished during th '90s. it seems this president is using every effort possible to bring tax and spend lib wall back into parlance. at least that's fair, being honest about where his party wants to take the country. folks on this committee, many folks in this town, who would be okay with a tax and spend approach if it at least provided us with some balance. if it at least provided us with a budget that balanced eventually. of course the most glaring fault, the most glaring error in the president's budget, is that it never balances. doesn't even try to balance.

in fact it's hard to call it a budget if it never really balances. the president talks abus approa. most people would expect it would ultimately arrive at something that balances. but it doesn't. in fact, different term for the president's budget, because it can't be called a budget. they're supposed to balance at the end of the year. it's not a budget. it is a plan to tax and to spend. why is it important? we can talk in this committee as we often do about the trillions of dollars of debt, the huge percentage of gdp, the credit crisis that we could face, the debt shock that we're going to face. i fear that probably means more to economists and to politician to folks back home. i think it's important, when we look at the president's budget, we look at wha t proposal for the future of this country means to the people back home. because the president never brings the budget to balance, by

the end of this ten-year budget window, the president will be proposing to spend more money on interest than on veterans' benefits or unemployment. he proposes to be spending more money nt on medicaid. almost twice as much money on interest than on alldisctionary together. that includes things like education and public safety. twice as much moneyos things. almost nearly as much money on defense. is that a plan for the future? is that really the country that we want to live in, where we're spending that much money on deficits that we've run up during these years? by way of example, our budget will spend almost $250 billion more on medicare than on interest in 2022. st$250 billion more on medicare than on interest in 2022. yo h