promise and risks the health and econ s we will have more discussion in the amendment process on how to modernize and strengthen medicare and medicaid without breaking that promise to our seniors. and with that i want to three minutescgresswoman kathy kester from florida. >> i thank my colleague. clearly, democrats and republicans have different visions for america. the republican vision is bleak. it is very harsh. just since the republican budget was rolled out yesterday independent commentators have called it reverse robin hood. they've called it extreme. they've called it disturbing. and there is no better example of that than the republicans' insignificance that the promise made to generations of americans that is medicare be broken. medicare is that fundamental w

for more than 45 years, that y you pay into medicare, you play by the rules, you are going to live your retirement years in dignity. you will not go bankrupt. your family will not go bankrupt because you have some diagnosis or chronic illness. i think medicare is one of the initiatives thatakeat. but unfortunately, as republica do not share that view. and let's talk about specifics in i know the republicans like to say this isn't going to affect anyone for many, many years. it of the improvements we adopted two years ago and it does in fact cut medicare benefits that are currently available. second, it will increase premiums out-of-pocket cost. it ends guaranteed guaranteed ct

our parents and grandparents have paid for. and it puts them at the mercy of private insurance companies. whit does is it scraps all of that important work and cost savings and reform that we accomplished two years ago that is at work now, the cost curve. and in fact when you compare private insurance companies and medicare, it's traditional medicare that has a better result and saves more money. so in contrast now, i think here in congress why. why are you cutt medicare? why is it more important when you're cutting medicare to ecuch as those for big oil? why when you're cutting medicare is it more important to increase tax br f medicare is it important to shift the burden to middle-class

i think the bottom line is we have got -- we've got a fight on our hands. and if we're going to keep the promise of medicare, if you vaomise to keep families -- allow their lives in dignity, then this republican plan. this is an important american value, and it's absolutely worth i'm happy to at this time yield time to mr. pascrell from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. to start by saying this is a p every budget that's ever presented bthhe republican partr the know-noth this is a political document, as much as you care saying it's an economic document, which partly it is.

r you've sold us, tried to sell thehat emphasized the wealthy, our mos th comparing this budget to the 1 less for veterans who do their job every day and you pat them on the back at worst. we got what we paid for. the great depression. let me tell you something. i'm happy you budget. i'm happy to run against it politically, economically, any way you say it. because you've handed it to us. it defines battle. enough of bipartisanship, you're saying. and i couldn't agree more with the gentleman from oklahoma. he's not here now. it's time we came together. this docum manner, shape, or form a reaching out. it's a reaching back. it didn't work then.

it's not going to work now. you think we have learned from the mistakes. instead, the budgeton dhose fai providing money to the very wealthy and mdisguised as tax r. that's the best one yet. you must have worked hard on that. by using deficit reduction asve in the future, cutting education, when you compare the two budgets that we already know about right now, by 33%. we say investments in the future. you must havepas. i have reviewed and support the democratic amendments. they start to fix this mess this budget would create. but first i can't reiterate this enough. in regards to the chairman's charge that our side doesn't have the courage to approach entitlement reform, you didn't read the hea care bill.

health care reform was entitlement reform. 1/3 of and i suffered through the ways and means committee, all of that. had to read those pages. but let me tell you 1/3 of it devoted to medicare and medicaid. read it. it's the reform. medicare, just made the statement that the financial outlook for medicare programming is substantially approved as a of the affordable health care act. time is up? okay. i was just getting started. >> well done. thank you, mr. point i yield si minutes to mr. blumenau. >>ha first of all, i would like to commend my friend mr. ryan for holding true to the principles i hope this is something that the committee can actuay. because i think the i think the opportunity for crop insurance, this is something that maybe the

committee can get i must take exception to my good friend the ranking member who talks our making the wrong choices. because actually, other than the ag, you've made no choices. i t courage to say that on the hard tough choices for the most fortunate and the stoing to red their taxesaround and reduce medicaid for all our states that are in a downward spiral, that that's going to be reduced 45%, or 19 million people cut back on food stamps. that doesn't take much courage. it's ducking the issues, in my humble opinion.

when i look athe you talk to your constituents, who are going gonzo right now because of the pressure on thetates are do. and you would retreat from that. over the course of the next ten years -- now, mr. ryan actually to cut the tax rates for the most fortunate and for a lot of other people, but it's going to be deficit neutral. you're going to raise 18%, 19%. how are you going to do that? not a clue. there aren't enough loopholes, tax reductions, without impacting the things that our constituents rely upon greatly, like the home mortgage deduction. you go through the list. how are you going to come up with $6.2 trillion to make this

deficit neutral? mr. ryan wouldn't sayiness conf. you haven't said a word about what those reduction are. you're just going to leave it to those of us on the ways and means committee. respect, that's not much of an answer. that's not courage. that's not a path to actually reduce the budget. you don't have a clue about how you'll close that $6.2 trillion gap except y voiceless. look at the independent analysis. you've got it if you ask your if you follow this le who look path you're going to be down to 4% or less of the gdp and y to . it doesn't work. m

no money for food -- it is a sham.stions in terms of how you're going to fix the tax system. you're going to leave a yawning deficit. you have abrogated the agreement we made last fall and wrote into r,ty members, so you're going to break the agreement we did last fall and make the job of mr. cole and mr. simpson into a ni to get something done andutdown budget in the fall. i think it's sad. it's not courage. it's n a it is a political document. and we've decided we're going to play politics here. what a surprise on the budget committee. but don't's anything other than a budget plan and ducking the tough questions. my colleague msss our time to use

she sees fit. i thank the gentleman for yielding. in addition to the tax cuts promised to the ri large that they can't come close to meeting the revenue targets, wit increases on the middle class the republican windfall for corporate america at the expense of american workers and deficit reduction.o corporations contributes to job lo corporate tax system has created a competitive disadvantage for domestic businesses that choose notgen o and rewards companies for sending american jobs oerseas. the result is not only millions of lost jobs but also trillions of dollars of lost revenue. a case in point is the repatriation tax hol 2004. this bad tax hols added to the

deficit. an october "wall street journal" article found that the 15 companies that benefited the most from an '04 tax break for profits cut more than 20,000 net jobs and decreased the pace of their research spending. the "wall street journal" goes on to warn against repeating the tax break, calling the '04that cost the u.s. treasury $3.3 billion in estimated loss revenues over ten years and led to u.s. companies directing more funds offshore. and the most damaging finding,e repatriation tax giveaway put essentially, this is what is proposed in the republican budget. what we are going to do is reduce the tax rate for corporations, drive jobs overseas, not revenue, which then automatically leads to the deep cuts that my colleagues

described and also leads eventually to raising taxes on the middle back my time. >> i thank you, ms. bass. and i now yield nine minutes to m. >> thank you. this congress has a big job. it's our responsibility to keep the focus protecting the economy, promoting long-term economic growth, and putting america back on a sustainable fiscal path. congress has to do this in a way that spreths across our society. our seniors cannot and should not be left behind. as my colleagues explained, the house republican budget failso goals. the republican budget protects subsidies for oil companies college students. their budget gives more tax cuts to america'srporions while cutting funding for food safety, medical research, and

better roads. these are not the priorities that my families and my communit subsidize the ultrawealthy are unpopular because they fail to create jobs, opportunity, or security for america's middle class over the pastit'sime to l broken ideas behind. my democratic colleagues and i are going to offer amendments to into a plan that meets the real needseconomy. our amendments will end unaffordable tax cuts for millionaires, absurd tax breaks for oil and other unfair special interest tax giveaways. democrats will argue for responsible investments in building blocks of competitive . blocks that include basic research, modern infrastructure, clean energy, workforce development, and education. my colleagues will offer commitn

and immediate upgrades to america's crumbling highways, bridges, and transit systems. to invest $35 billion to modernize at least 35,000 american public schools and community colleges, and direct $1 billion to put 20,000 veterans to work restoring our national parks and public lands. investments like these will create thousands of sustain our economy, recovery, and help shape a new american economy. that the economy of mittee the last decade was built on shaky ground of financial speculation, consumer debt, and imported it's gone. past government policies that contributed to that failed economy are gone aso build a better economy built on a foundation of advanced innovation, and exports. the world-class economy, though, folks, is not free. countries that we compete against, china, brazil, india,

huge investments in rearch, and. so we need as members of congress to have a chance that we will demonstrate that we can make smart investments for the country we all say we want to have and leave to our children. and with that i yield three minutes to congressman honda from cor >> thank you. and i just want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for this opportunity. last week the chairman released of this budget. in it the chairman asks, what if your member of congress saw a crisis coming and d respect no this room, no one in this congress is suggesting we close our eyes, do e problems before us today. this is a debate about whichs are best for this country.

this is a debate about the sacrifices and tradeoffs we must make. who must contribute and where can we afford to cut back? all of these are tough decisions and no one takes them lightly. but the way a person these questions reveal his principles and values. this budget debate forces us to answer these questions by tearing apas not a road map for prosperity. it is an outline for a grand conservative experiment treasu serving as lab rats. i do not believe in ogram.menting with medicare and i do not believe in experimenting with medicaid or the low-income children, parents, seniors, and people with disabilities that this program protects. we need a budget that works l c well off. instead we should be listening to the american people and seek. it is not sensible to take the cut, cut, cut approach to all of

our nation's challenges. i am particularly disappointed that this budget sets even lower spending levels than established under the budget control although i oppose it, the president made a deal with this republican majorit fom that deal. it is impossible for us to govern when the majority contin the goalposts. this has been the pattern of behavior for this entire session, and i hope for tt it w stop. we can do here's how. we need to be honest about the best way to create apro-growth economy. as i think my republican colleagues would agree, part of that solution is empowering the tax policies. but that isn't all the entire solution. part of the soln must involve government investment in priorities we believe in. this incluin smarter, more sophisticated workforce

education. the president's budget takes direction. it provides $60 billion for education, jobs. $25 billion tohe layoffs. 5 billion to support reforms in the teacher profession. and 30li least 35,000. and this is why democrats are focused oneed to invest for all children in each thank the gen. >> we really see a stark contrast between the ics' budge before us today, a budget that hurts the middle class and those that are struggling to get out of povertyan balanced plan to invest in our economy. part of the district i have the privilege of representing is an area often silicon forest because o t of h companies that call it home. se us to have some of the world'sn

small, as our comtyd they truly manufacturers, they're exportors. and since an enthusiastic workforce is needed for all b . reinforce andcerate erything we our economic recovery. by supporting research and development efforts and investing in advanced sector uring technology. dividends paid by the research, facilitated by, for example, the national institutes of atioth and the department of energy. esr. we know we cannot drill our way out of the international oil market out. we've made some exciting advancements in recent years in the area of green and renewabl energy. solar, win, and even wave energy technologies will all have criticolroad to energy independ.

and as these technologies continue to develop, we must improve upon our workforce development initiatives. community colleg expanding access to education and workforce development opportunities. in oregon, for exciting partne develop between green energy, technology manufacturers, and community colleges. these partnerships have to be a complement to technology academic programs at the colleges, providing students with the opportunity to seeha a skills relevant to local businesses. and to quality education must start well mmunies.dren reach are the we have an obligation to ensure th funding necessary to deliver the type of quality education that all of our children desy reach college it's important that the option of higher education is available

cutting pell grants and raising student loan interest rates in ordere tax brr millionaires, let's workesve th grant and keep our from doublin. continued access to these financial aid programs will help prepare our next generation of workers for their careers next generation technologies i there is indeed a clear contrast here between the chairman'swhat democratic colleagues and i are proposing. we are at a fork in the road, and i urge my colleagues to avoid the path to poverty byrma proposal and coming together to craft a balanced approach that invests in our fut any time. >> thank you. and i yield nine minutes to mr.

hollen. we clearly have a serious long-term problem in this country with rising health care cost. it impacts veterans who serve our country who relies on track care in highland hills. it affects a senior w in thousand oaks, in northeast san antonio. it impacts someone who has nothing but medicare to provide their health care in san marcos. and it affects people across this country. but the fundamental question that mr. ryan's republican budget presents today is whether the solution to that health care cost problem that impacts so many americans is to shift more of the burdeble including our seniors in nursing homes, if that will solve the rising health care costs. taxpayer to the senior is the

wrong approach to take. now, we've heard from many of who've gotten behind mr. ryan's plan that he's visionary and that anyone who doesn't agree with him is demagogic or is involved in oul than to tell people the only alternative that they have to medicare going bankrupt is to adopt his plan? i don't t while well thought out, is visionary. i think it's rather myopic, that he needs a different set of glasses to look the issues, the vision from the standpoint of that senior in san marcos or in east austin, who's and now he would give them instead of the defined benefits program of medicare, he'd give an that certificate, that voucher would buy that heah car because there is a feeling by

some of the more right-wing commentators that if you do that that seniors wl heth care proba not using as much, which is not all that different than seniors having to cut their pills in two icean is not to have the food and the nutrition that they need.we knos vision of a vouchered system, it,voucr system.been some bell that behind it is just the general republican disdain for the retirement security programs to go back to the era of fdr. instead of the vision of lyndon johnson, who got this right in, who, when he's not having an oops moment, refers to social security as a ponzi system. of commitment to retint better appe

economic ladder tospsibility fo financing retirement security so we don't continue to have tax breaks for billionaires and multinnair share but we have the revenues at the the cost issues as we did through the affordable care act, that we have the revenues for a balanced approach. it is not seniors, to blame retirees for the problems we have in medicare. it is essential that we seek a bala a person who really understands is the gentlewoman from florida, and i would yield 2 to her to discuss this matter o thank you for your eloquence. over the past several months in hearing after hearing on this committee just as we heard last

wrecovering theme from our expert witnesses that have come before chairman bernanke said it. director elmendorf said acting director zients said it and secretary geithner reaffirmed that the draconian reckless cuts proposed by the proposal today willident in create an enormous headwind for our economy. yet here we are again this budget raebds the same and these arguments sound the same. i feel like it'ser ain but bill is nowhere in sight and this is no comedy. in all seriousness the harmful spending cuts incorporated into this budge simply damaging a fragile recovery. these cuts fr our most vulnerable, our seniors, our children, and those with serious illness. the way to deal with rising health care costs is to give seniors a voucher to purchase keep their rance and told t

own health care costs down. essentially telling them they're on their own. today we will be offering amendments that will preserve the med kaish guarantee and reject financing tax cuts for the wealthy and special interests on the backs of our seniors and will protect the important benefits includedn y closing the prescription drug part of our budget alternative that builds on the comprehensive health care reforms in the affordable care act to allow for furred medicare savings as the affordable care act already does. democrats believe that we cannot solve our budgeby shifting heal and risks on to people who are least able to bear them, seniors, disabled individuals, and poor families. in a few hours i plan to offer an amendment that no one on this committee or in th bndment woul harmful and reckless medicaid cuts to seniors in nur you that

would be devastating for seniors and older americans. this republican path to poverty passes like a tornado through america's nursing homes where millions of american seniors receive long-term and end of life care. 60% of americans in nursing homes are on medicaid-p so cuts to medi dramatically negative impact on the federal government made a commitment to each and every one of us that when we got older we would not need to live in poverty or force our children for us. for decades we've looked to medica federal government would honor its commitment. now under this budget plan republicans are trying to back seniors. we cannot go back on our promise to the greatest generation. there is a better way forward. as the president lai out in his budget request and as we will discuss today, we canmu produce responsible budget that doesn't place an undue burden on our seniors and most ln with that i yield to someone else who would know quite a