compared to current law, it represents a tax cut of $1.8 trillion. like the original fiscal commission proposal, the plan also includes a number of process changes to improve budgetelp enforce fiscal discipline. these include -- discretionary spending caps through 2022, enforced by a 60 vote point of order and sequester. fire calls between security and non-security through 2015. a separate cap for war funding with annual limits proposed by the president. a more rigorous emergency designation procedure, and annual budgeting for disasters. let me just say with respect to more rigorous emergency designation procedure, senator crapo has done an enormous amount of work on trying to close down the emergency designation loophole so abused in the past. some of those provisions are

provided here. all of them that were in bowles-simpson. pressuring congress a ratio starting in 2015. more accurate inflation adjustments for indexed programs, and a process to ensure more reliable and timely extended unemployment benefits. so that's the plan. it's comprehensive. it's balanced. it's fair. it represents i believe the best blueprint we have from which to build a bipartisan agreement. but i recognize it is not perfect, and i recognize adjustments will have to be made before anything like this can hope to be adopted. those adjustments will have to be negotiated, and those negotiations will take time. those of us who are involved in the commission certainly know that. i intend to give members time to evaluate my chairman's mark and then i hope to hear back from you on how you think we can best

maximize the chance of actually getting a result. how can we best maximize the chance of actually getting a result? we are facing a fiscal train wreck at the end of this year. the expiration of all of the bush era tax cuts, the sequester, i don't think anybody thinks that would be a good place to go. it is time to move off our fixed positions. i understand. that's probably unlikely right before an election. but before the end of the year, we're going to have to find a way to come together. this fiscal commission budget plan represents, i believe, a blueprint to begin that conversation. i'll now turn to senator sessions for purpose of his making any statement he may wish

to make, and as i noted earlier, may recognize other members of the committee as the, the history of this committee in markup. we do that in seniority order, alternating between the sides to the extent it is possible to do, if there are more members on one side than the other, we'll just go right down so that everybody who is here has a chance as quickly as possible to speak. we will not be considering amendments during today's session. oh amendments are not in order, but opening statements are in order, and chairman sessions, or ranking member sessions, thank very much for your courtesies throughout the hearing season, and, please, proceed with your statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and it has been a pleasure to work with you throughout these two years, and i know that you understand the challenges facing this country. you've articulated them time and time again.

you've warned us that we pleneeo take action, we're on an aun sustainable path. the problem is, we haven't done it. we haven't made the kind of changes that are necessary in our debt course to put america on the kind of path that we should be on. and it's very discouraging for us. i see four new members of this budget committee that just joined the senate this year. portman and toomey and aodd and johnson, they have fought to get on the committee. they lobbied and they wanted to be a part of a great debate about the future of america when they won elections just two years ago. a little less than two years ago, and first year we had no budget in this committee. and i appreciate your being frustrated by that, and i know you intended to have a markup this year and move a budget at least in committee. as you did year before last. but i know there were forces

aligned against that. i know the lead are and others and i guess the entire democratic conference just did not want to be confronted with the challenges inherent in changing the debt course of america. i don't think that's your belief, but that is obviously where we are. so we've got to be -- i have to say, how deeply disappointed we are we're not able to go forward with the kind of budget markup that a markup justifies. we're not able to offer amendments. will not be able to offer counterbailing a new budget. a different approach. and actually be able to get down to numbers, because we've had secret meetings in committees and discussions, outlines and frameworks, but when it's late out in real numbers, like congressman ron has done, like senator toomey has done, people look at it and express their view. they either like it or don't like it, but it has reality to it. and the kind of power to it that

just talk does not have. so i have to say, i'm disappointed that we're not being able to have the kind of markup that ought to be basic to the statute other duty of this committee to fulfill its responsibility to produce a budget. a couple of things i would say. there has been, and i just want to say this, because i believe it's important, a systematic plan for several years on behalf of senator reid, i guess, and the democratic leadership to avoid votes on budgets. to avoid being accountable for having a real plan for the future. for example, the budget not brought up, and last year, our democratic colleagues voted against the ron budget. voted against the president's budget. they voted against the toomey budget. voted against the paul budget. they voted against every single

one, and there has not been on record yet for one. i thought at least in the committee today we might have the democratic committee members at least stand up and cast a vote for or against this budget, but they're not going to do so. so once again, they'll be an and kags of the responsibility of the majority part in my view because you have the power to pass a budget with only 50 votes with the vice president's support. parenthetically i would note that the budget that juv offered and the plan you've offered, i don't think is consistent totally with the, at least the simpson-bowles plan, at least as i understood it to be. from my examination of this budget, you have no additional cuts over those that were in the budget control act of last

summer. no additional spending reductions at all. 2.1 trillion in spending cuts over ten years, no more than that. but your budget calls for $2.6 trillion in new taxes. so that is a tax, a tax budget. president obama at one point stated that he thought that we should haves 3ds in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increase. we're so far from that, i'm amazed. now, looking at the house version of simpson-bowles, they did a, they had a trillion less in tax increases and they did cut spending by about $600 billion. but that was they're version of it and it went down dramatically with only 38 votes. so i just want to say to you, our people are ready to participate. we're disappointed that the majority party decided not to go forward with a plan for the future, to confront the debt

challenges that we have. i won't use up any more time. i will give, offer for the record, my statement. we've got a large number of people here i know would like to speak. again, let me say how much i've enjoyed working with you, and you did note that simpson-bowles laid out some valuable plans that should have been a part of any future budget plan for america, and it was designed to move right after 2010. so i have to think that the president deserves great -- an expression of great disappointment that he did not seize that moment, and begin that discussion, and then we could have really gone into it and maybe it would have been a better chance at that point, but he definitely decided that he would not lay out a realistic plan for the future, and is

actually committed to attacking those like congressman ron who have laid out one. so i've been very disappointed at that. so here we are. your remarks raise all the important issues that face our country. we ought to listen to what you say, and then bring to bear our own philosophies and approaches to government as we wrestle with the key issues you've listed. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the ranking member for his statement, and i thank him for his courtesy throughout this year, and the professionalism of he and his staff. i appreciate it. senator murray? >> well, mr. chairman, thank you very, very much for your longtime leadership and consistency and hard work on getting this congress, this country, on track to a better place, and i really appreciate the tremendous work you are doing, and continue to do on this. you know, there are two very separate issues that are being talked about here, and i want to be clear about the distinction,

because i think they're already becoming confused. the two issues are, the fiscal year 2013 spending levels, and the need for a long-term balanced and bipartisan deficit reduction plan. the first issue, fiscal year 2013 spending levels, for next year, is easy. it's already done. in august of last year, democrats and republicans came together. we all know that. we agreed to the budget control act to cut spending and put in place a process for additional deficit reduction. the purpose of that bipartisan agreement was to move towards serious deficit reduction, and to give some consistency to the federal budget so americans wouldn't be threatened with the government shutdown every few months. that bipartisan deal set the levels for next year's discretionary spending which allows us now in congress to do our jobs and work to allocate our resources as we must do every year, towards investments in jobs and infrastructure, maintaining our commitment to

service members and veterans and protecting our middle class families, everything else we do with our appropriations bills every year. that was the agreement we came to, speaker boehner shook on it. minority leader mcconnell shook on it. majority leader reid signed on. i joined with many of my colleagues voting on it. putting our names on it. and president obama signed it into law. it became the law of the land. and senate democrats fully intend to honor our word and stick to that bipartisan letter level for this next year and i must add i'm really disappointed unless the nine months after we all voted and shoog on, the house republicans turned around and inted to break that, but that is clearly not part of what we all felt we had shook on and voted on. but despite what we're hearing from them, the budget control act which this budget committee is designed to do, has been voted on. it's in law. it's settled. we have a lot of challenges in

front of us as a nation and can't afford to relitigate bipartisan deals every time somebody makes some noise in a meeting. so i'm very glad that you, mr. chairman, have decided to focus this committee on advancing a real long-term balanced and bipartisan deficit and debt reduction package. basically, you're saying to us, let's look forward, not look backwards. and as i saw during my chairmanship of the commit on deficit reduction, i know as other members of that committee know, you know, that is not going to be easy. we're going to have to make some very difficult choices as a nation about our priorities over the long term. and there are significant differences between the two parties when it comes to the values that drive our approaches between tackling some of these tough fiscal challenges. that's why i really think it is good that you have put the bipartisan simpson-bowles plan in front of us, and for this committee, then to have the time to really sarsly seriously look

at and begin to give this committee's input and to begin to build on. it's a plan that has sdraut port from both sides, and both ends of the political spectrum, and i know of no individual member agrees with every single part of it. in fact, there's some i disagree with pretty strongly but i think is-it-is a very productive, smart starting point for this committee in the interests of moving towards what we need to get to in this year which is a bipartisan comprehensive deal. i think one of the most important things about you laying down this mark is that it puts everything on the table. it doesn't wall off some pieces or declare certain parts off limits because one side or the other doesn't think they ought to be touch pd and that is a contradictal part of this because every single bipartisan that put it together does toe isn't a balanced way. it's the only way we'll be able to get to something. that means we have to, as you describe, mr. chairman, look at

both sides of the ledger. it means making sure that we are responsibly cutting spending. in making sure our entitlements programs seniors and vulnerable families depend on are secured for the next generation. it means examining where we can save money, even on the defense side. and it means raising revenue. and for me, that, of course, puts on the table what i think is an important part of that, is looking at what wealthiest americans and biggest corporations are paying today in relation to fairness, to many middle income families. and i would just say that at the end of the day we have to all remember, that are around this table, numbers on a page are not what a budget is about. it's about the real people across this country that are being impacted. this is really about our future. mr. chairman, you have clearly outlined to all of us, and if we are serious about our work here, we will take what you have laid down in front of us and look at it seriously, and give you our input, recognizing the end of

this year has some pretty big exclamation points on it and we as a committee have tremendous work in front of us. senator sessions i understand where you're coming from and your frustration. i will say this. we can put down a plan, debate it or do the work as the chairman of this committee urged us to do seriously look at the future, seriously look at this in a bipartisan way. use the foundation out there and build on that that is truly our obligation to do today. >> thank you. >> chairman conrad, thank you for calling, or -- i thank you, chairman conrad, for calling a markup of the budget for fiscal year 2013. setting a budget for the country is one of the most basic responsibilities and fundamental functions of congress. the budget act requires congress

to adopt a budget by april 15th. it's a requirement that this senator majority ignored time and again. in fact, the senate hasn't adopt add budget since april 29, 2009, nearly three years have passed since the senate last adopted a budget. during that time, more than $4 trillion has been added to the nation's debt. we're in the midst of the fourth consecutive year of spending more than $1 trillion more than we take in. during this time, the senate democratic majority has failed to propose a budget blueprint that would lay out their priorities for deficit reduction, economic growth or a path to balance. they've said proposing a budget is, quote/unquote, foolish. it's no wonder our nation is driving towards a fiscal cliff of deficits and debt. there's no one in the democratic leadership willing to take ahold of the wheel. while i'm glad that we're meeting to consider a budget

resolution put forward by the chairman, i'm puz manied by today's exercise. first the chairman has said repeatedly that we already have a budget in place for this year and next. the chairmanen and majority leader reid feel that the budget control act was a budget resolution. so, then, why are we here? why do we need to markup a budget resolution if the budget control act was truly a budget resolution? the answer's quite clear. the budget control act is not a budget. president obama clearly agreed when he proposed his budget. house republicans and democrats alike agreed when they voted on seven budget resolutions authored by both republicans and democrats. the democratic leadership and the senate stands alone in their belief that the budget control act was a budget resolution. is it because they have no idea on how to balance a budget? contain out of control spending? grow the economy?

create jobs? i don't know. i'm also confounded by what i've read in the press that this markup will end today with no consideration of the amendments and without a vote on the chairman's budget resolution. a markup entails debate, amending and actually marking up a resolution. but today is nothing more than speeches with a suggestion that maybe we'll meet again sometime near the end of the year, to offer amendments and vote on resolution. the chairman was quoted yesterday as saying, "this is the wrong time to vote in committee. this is the wrong time to vote on the floor. i don't think that we will be prepared to vote before the election." do we need to add another $1 trillion to the national debt before it's time to vote on a budget resolution? or maybe even $2 trillion before we vote? if now is not the time to lead, proposed bold solutions and take action, when is? the american people will pay a

heavy price for the unwillingness and inability of the senate leadership to lead and offer solutions. i understand the predicament that our beloved chairman is in and i'm sorry that, for the way that. i understand the predictment that our chairman is in. he deserves better because he's been a leader in calling for fiscal control for a long period of time. despite what he knows should be done and wants to, his party leadership doesn't seem to want to do it. once again the senate democratic leadership and president obama intent on being absent from the discussion. there are no solutions. no leadership. there's only failure until after the next election. we have a moral obligation to offer solutions for today and for future generations.

the inactions weren't so serious. >> i think the senator is recognized for a statement. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate your leadership on the committee for many, many years. no one is more dedicated to getting our country on the right course and no one has spent more time in doing that. we're grateful for your commitment. you said a number of times, and i think it's important to keep repeating. last year we passed a tough budget law. it really has two pieces. a process to enforce spending levels for two years. that's really what a budget resolution does in the short run. we're not the appropriaro appro. it had a greater force because

it was signed by the president of the united states. so i feel confident in that. i appreciate senator murray's hard work and everybody in the economy to get us to the point where we had a deficit reduction plan. as chair of the agriculture committee, we took that very seriously. i reached off to the house chairman lucas and ranking member in the house, congressman peterman, and we put together a bipartisan plan. reforming programs. everything that the public asked us to do. so i know it can be done. it was what was required of the deficit reduction commission. $23 billion.

even though we didn't complete the process. we are competing with the deficit reduction as we run a farm mill. so it is a matter of our ability to work together and make the commitment. we can get it done. i know with your leadership that we can actually do this. i don't agree with everything in the proposal, i think it's a very important place to start. it's a very thoughtful place to start. it's clear we need to support job creation with real tax reform that simplyfis the tax code. lowers rates for individuals and businesses. fixing what is a long time broken physician payment rate system.

i'm involved in trying to get a long-term fix. however, i don't support efforts that balance the budgets on the backs of working families and seniors. because frankly those folks have had enough. they faced enough. the house budget committee, which i believe proposed and the house passed a budget resolution that represents absolutely the wrong values. to eliminate medicare, turn it into a voucher system costing over $6,000 more to the average senior. making huge cuts for low-income seniors who are in nursing homes on medicaid. that is absolutely the wrong approach. so those at the top can get another tax break is the wrong values for our country. to continue government subsidies

or some folks like oil companies making record proftds when we need to focus on new emerging technologies. we are looking at this proposal and how we get to the end on a comp rehenzic fax reform. jobs and opportunities families are what we focus on those who have taken a bigger hit in the economy. have sacrificed more than anybody else in the economy. they are the ones that we should be focused on and listening to. and finally, mr. chairman, you're in a very unique position with your experience on these issues. and your leadership to really help us come to the long term before the end of the year. what we don't have is a

long-term plan for fiscal sustainability. and i'm looking forward to working with you to get that done. >> for her kind remarks, senator is recognized for state. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when i hear comments about the house budget, i do get a little bit upset. we keep saying, well, the budget control act is sufficient. if the budget control act is sufficient, why did the president put forward a budget? why didn't he say it's sufficient and abrogate his obligation in much the same way we're abrogating our obligation? i was delighted. i was disappointed when the senate defeated the conrad greg

proposal for deficit commission. i was pleased when the president went ahead and appointed one. and i was again disappointed when -- at his state of the union speech following that. america doesn't realize the disaster that we're headed for. and had he paint that had picture and then said, but i'll have a budget that will put that guard and put forward the simpson-boles budget for us to debate and i assume pass if we had that on the minds. that didn't happen. he came forward with another stimulus budget. just as he did this year. today it's $15 trillion. without immediate action, that number will continue to increase to a level more unsustainable. we're spending more today than

ever before. and we're seeing trillion dollars a year increases in the debt with no end in sight. we won't be able to afford the military we need. people won't get their social security checks. roads won't be fixed. all our money will go towards paying interest on debt. people shouldn't doubt this is real. there were riots on the streets in greece when their government was forced to face the reality of debt. and their debt was less than ours. our debt per person is more than greece's debt per person. time and time again they've proven incapable of fiscal discipline needed in the means. time and again, the federal government spent more money than it brings in. it's led to the situation we currently face. we're now borrowing for every dollar we spend. they say they can't spend money we don't have. we don't have the option any longer.

unfortunately, we are hiding months today rather than making up a budget resolution. we're discussesing the majority's version of the plan. while i strongly support the simpson-boles plan and thanks the senators for their service on the commission. one key aspect was the bipartisan nature. i assume we're going to have a chance to work on that, even though they're past the deadline. we're supposed to find the areas where we can agree and push them forward. the simpson-bowles plan is a good outline. i assume in the budget that some of those details can't be done because they're excluded from the budget. but that isn't what we're doing today. in fiscal year 2011, the