Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    April 20, 2012 1:00pm-1:30pm EDT

1:00 pm
finance committee. that's why i've been late coming. with respect to my sense of where we are, it's pretty clear to me that what we have to find are big solutions for big economic challenges. and history of all of those kind of approaches, big solutions for big challenges means you have to come up with a way to fashion bipartisan approaches. when we achieve meaningful progrowth tax reform, you have a republican president fighting for it working with democratic colleagues signing it into law in 1986. when we're talking about preserving the social safety net for senior citizens president johnson championed it, pushed it through the dock with a huge bipartisan majority in 1965. we have mr. chairman and colleagues two concrete examples
1:01 pm
of major solutions. solutions for the ages that were achieved in a bipartisan kind of fashion. progrowth tax reform, president reagan and democrats in 1986 huge opportunities consummated by president johnson in 1965 in terms of social safety net. both with a pretty clear bipartisan approach from day one. there is a reason why this approach is the way to go. because if you try to tackle big issues in a straktly partisan way and you somehow manage to drive it actually through the congress and get it signed into law, there is not the bipartisan consensus that ensuring you can keep it. in fact history shows when you do it that way almost as soon as the ink is dry on a particular partisan achievement efforts are made to unravel it.
1:02 pm
>> i'm very pleased that senator begich talked about it, the fact is other senators, senator sessions and i have talked about this. we have an understanding of what needs to be done. you have to go in there and close out a slow array of the special interest loopholes. use the same dollars to hold down rates for everybody and keep progressivity. when we did this in 1986 we created according to to the bureau of labor statistic 6.3 million new jobs within two years. i'm not going to say, mr. chairman, and colleagues that every one of those jobs came about through tax reform. but it certainly didn't hurt in terms of setting the climate for growth. and now since 1986 we've had a host of commissions that have essentially said the same thing.
1:03 pm
the commission that was put together by george w. bush essentially proposed an updated version of what was done in 1986. the volker commission proposed the same thing. boles simpson we all sat in this room and i was thrilled when ur skin boles said what we had been talking about. we know what needs to be done. the question is whether we muster the political will to do it. in terms of benefits to the country having a precedent where we have actually done it to help create 6.3 million new jobs in two years sounds like a pretty aracketive way to proceed. with respect to medicare, mr. chairman, it is clear the challenge is to protect the medicare guarantee. this is what it's all about.
1:04 pm
is protecting the medicare guarantee since the days when i had a full head of hair and rugged good looks and was director of the senior citizens program. i've always seen this as sacred grounds. we know from the trustees that run the program in a decade we're not going to have the funds to ensure that that medicare guarantee is protected. once again, i think we have an opportunity to come together. i'm attracted to the concept of premium support. premium support is not something that has been rejected which is the concept of medicare vouchers. medicare vouchers are rejected because they're like coupons. you give somebody a coupon it doesn't keep up with their health care costs and that's clearly not acceptable. premium support which originated with democrats and now has been picked up by both democrats and republicans across the political spectrum is something very different.
1:05 pm
it is a way to ensure choice, but unlike vouchers which don't keep up with medical costs, a seniors specific contribution under medicare is tiered to the actual health costs they incure in a given area. it would be tiered to a seniors cost in north dakota or alabama. it's not a coupon, it's varied in relation to the actual cost that is senior has in a given area. if we do it that way, mr. chairman, i think we then have a chance to ensure for all time the vitality of traditional medicare and traditional medicare and the new options, the various kinds of other alternatives that emerge that will make the two in effect strengthen each other. you will have a stronger
1:06 pm
traditional medicare program and you will have choice much as seniors have today in communities like my own where more than 50% are already choosing these various kinds of alternatives. so that colleagues is a little bit of what i think is in front of us. it's pretty clear this is all about seizing the moment. and maybe it's not all going to come about today. maybe we're not going to get it all done tomorrow or in the next day. but i think we have a sense of what needs to be done. i've been pleased to have a chance to participate in bipartisan efforts now for close to a decade in terms of progrowth, bipartisan tax reform and a plan for protecting the medicare guarantee for all time and i think we've got a path to address both issues which are essentially driving this economy, driving the budget in a
1:07 pm
bipartisan fashion. i just want however tardy i am for the day mr. chairman to say i look forward to working with you and senator sessions and frankly i look up and down the line. i know colleagues have logged a lot of time in these bipartisan precincts and big solutions for big economic challenges are going to take that kind of bipartisan effort the way both president johnson and president reagan showed decades ago. i think it's time to step up and do it again. >> i thank the senator. >> senator toomey is recognized for a statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. well, i find it difficult to fully express how disappointed where i am and what i'm hearing today. i think you did a regional job laying out the nature of the fiscal crisis we face. the unprecedented proportions of this crisis and correctly observed that we desperately need a long-term budget plan. i've heard many people repeat
1:08 pm
that. the fact is republicans have offered this plan and with the exception of the chairman, democrats are unwilling to budge. this is a stark contrast. the house has passed the plan. and you can argue all you like and disagree and that's all fine and fair. but they laid out a vision and it's a plan that would put us on a sustainable fiscal path. i think that's indisputable. and from my point of view, an elected member of congress really doesn't have very much credibility taking potshots at these plans if they're not willing to offer an alternative. i think it's totally unacceptable. for either party to simply say we're opposed to that, but we're not going to suggest anything in the alternative. that's why i give you a lot of credit, mr. chairman, for laying out a plan. and i can't believe that we're in an environment, we're in a situation today and apparently tomorrow if this continues where
1:09 pm
our democratic colleagues are simply afraid to cast a vote. afraid to tell us if they support this plan. on our side i don't think that's the case. in fact, several of us have drafted our own plans. i put an enormous amount of time and energy and work as did my staff in producing for a second consecutive year a comprehensive budget resolution. this reflects the thinking of many of my republican colleagues, many democratic ideas that are embodied in this and plenty of ideas from the outside. i'm sure it's got all kinds of flaws. but it's a vision that gets us to a balanced budget. it accomplishes a number of things and i think we ought to be debating it, amending it, casting votes on it. i think my colleagues on this side are willing to do that. actually we voted last year on something very similar to this. and almost all my republican colleagues voted for it. and i understand the opposition that came from the other side, but where was the alternative.
1:10 pm
i just can't believe that someone would suggest to the american people that they ought to be the majority party in control of the united states senate and not feel an obligation to lay out a plan that solves the biggest problem this country faces, which is the unsustainable fiscal crisis that we're in, but that's what we're hearing. that's what we see today. so, mr. chairman, i think your frustration must be enormous. it's probably maybe even greater than mine. but i want to walk through a few of the big ideas that i've wrestled with that i've laid out in this budget resolution to illustrate just how frustrating this is not to have a counter part that should be a negotiating koun part, but one that's unwilling to take a stand on anything and therefore makes it very hard to negotiate. for instance, one of the things that i think is important and in my budget, to demonstrate a way we can reach a balance within a ten-year window. that's not easy to do that. you have to make painful
1:11 pm
decisions. and we could have a reasonable argument about whether that's even necessary. i think many on the other side probably don't think that that's necessary to balance the budget. i happen to think it is a worthwhile goal. we ought to get there within some reasonable time frame. but we'll never know if we don't have people that are willing to say here's a different idea. here's a better idea, here's an alternative. because we have this silence from the other side. on tax reform, i actually think there's a lot of common ground at least in principal. i know there is with senator wyden. i think there is with the chairman. i've got a pretty detailed parameters that my budget would lay out for the committees of jurisdiction that would call for the kind of simplification and progrowth tax reform called for by bipartisan commissions, lowering marginal rates, offsetting the lost revenue by contrasting the value of deductions and exclusions and we could have a very ve bous discussion about how we should
1:12 pm
do that or whether or not that's the right thing to do. but what do we have from the other side? unwillingness to take a position on medicare, my budget calls for the implementation after ten years of the bipartisan plan that senator wyden just discussed. and i frarngly think that's a very constructive idea that puts us own a long-term solution for medicare. not the only one, but it's a solution. it works. in the meantime i suggested in the budget that folks on medicare now and whose income is less than $85,000 would have no change whatsoever. but if your income is over $85,000, i suggest that we implement president obama's suggestion whereby those relatively affluent seniors would pay a little bit more in terms of their contribution to the medicare benefit. if your income is above $150,000 as a retiree, guess what, you're pretty wealthy. for those folks i suggested that
1:13 pm
they contribute even more than the president has contributed. i don't know if there's agreement on the other side if people don't take a stand and say here's what i'm for. that's what's so frustrating. we've been will willing to offer ideas and suggestions. it's very hard. i hear people say i hope we'll come together and reach an agreement and do this bipartisan agreement. if one side won't tell us what they're for, it's really, really hard to find out where the common ground is. i just want to say mr. chairman, i am extremely disappointed. i think we are here today witnessing a profound abdication of responsibility. a huge lost opportunity.
1:14 pm
>> i thank the senator. senator murkily is recognized for a statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. the budget is a statement of values. it likes out a guide where we as a country are going over the years to come. in setting on a budget we need to think long and hard and answer key questions that will determine our path. will we be spending money nation building abroad or nation building at home. that is will we be investing in education and infrastructure here in america. will we be caring for our veterans, our seniors, our homeless, the hungry. will we be investing in clean energy research that will help us end our addiction to foreign
1:15 pm
oil. will we invest in stem education, science, technology, engineering. it's essential to those that will do the research and build the products that build the american economy. will we fund the agencies that enforce our trade laws or not? we have to be responsible for tanss we give in. the course of this discussion it's very important to understand how we came into the current sea of red ink. wars in iraq and afghanistan unpaid for. bush era tax cuts unpaid for. medicare part d drug plan unpaid for. and then the deregulation of the mortgage sectors.
1:16 pm
result predatory loans surged. bogus aaa securities proliferated. a multitrillion dollar insurance industry going by the fancy name of swaps and derivatives. sprang up from nothing with $50 trillion business in a short period of time. and did so without the oversight, the diversity of the reserves that are essential. all these things creating the biggest bubble and meltdown since the great depression based on decisions made here. that members around this table many of whom participated in. how do we rebuild? do we do so on the backs of the people that are repressed by the high interest loans, who are oppressed by the collapse of
1:17 pm
home prices. who are oppressed by loss of jobs. are these the folks that deregulated the home mortgage? are these the folks who failed to pay attention to the unregulated swaps and derivatives? are these the folks involved in is the securities industry? i don't think so. so here are some better ideas. how about we end the war in afghanistan and split the proceeds $120 a million three ways. third to paying down the deficit. 1/3 to invest in infrastructure. 1/3 to investing in education. how about we end some huge special interest programs in the tax code that waste taxpayer dollars. we vote on the floor and the senate just a couple weeks ago. cost billions of dollars a year.
1:18 pm
it's a powerful big oil companies simply put in the bank are sitting on more than $50 billion in the bank right now. i was fascinated by speeches that said, you know what? we can't close one tax loophole unless we close them all. by folks who realized that they weren't at all prepared to take on the task of closing those tax loopholes. how about we eliminate the $175 billion in defense programs that robert gates former defense secretary said don't contribute one bit to national security. how about we end our addiction to foreign oil that's costing up a billion dollars a day. creating jobs and wealth overseas. how about we spend those energy dollars here in the united states and create wealth and jobs here in america. it's a triple win. improvement in national security, improvement in jobs,
1:19 pm
improvement in clean air. how about we recognize that we are systemically undermined the security in our country through our failure to invest in infrastructure and our failure to invest in education. china is spending 10% of itself gdp. europe is spending 5% of its gdp on infrastructure. we're spending 2% and we're having a debate over whether we continue the fiscal year of 2011 spending infrastructure or we take the house plan that cuts 35% with our transportation and infrastructure spending that is not a debate that is going to take us forward to a strong economy in the future. how about we address the fact that we've lost five million manufacturing jobs here in the last ten years and that's five million living wage jobs that ordinary families don't have. often jobs with benefits and how
1:20 pm
about we rebuild that manufacturing economy there will be a middle class in america. these are the type of issues that are embedded in the decisions that we make around a budget. that is the task before this committee. i thank you, mr. chairman for calling us to this chair to deliberate. it is incredibly important issues to the future of our nation. thank you. >> i thank the senator. senator johnson is recognized for a statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's always fun going toward the end here. you have to remain somewhat flexible. try not to repeat what some of my colleagues have said. first of all, i am sympathetic with your predictment. i know you actually do understand the problem. i know you've worked hard and i've appreciated a number of the hearings that have been
1:21 pm
educational. let's face it, this is a prettical process here. it's our obligation to inform, to persuade, i think to win the argument. i think the american people also deserve a choice. they can't make that choice if one side refuses to put their plan on the table. if one side simply refuses to vote for what they're for. if one side simply refuses to pass anything. i've listened to a number of words i heard. the first one is responsibility. when i was elected i told the voters of wisconsin it's an awesome responsibility. it's one i take very seriously. it's a responsibility of this committee to pass a budget resolution by april 1st. and of the united states senate to pass a budget by april 15th. did i say august 1st? i meant april 1st and april 159.
1:22 pm
that's a responsibility. we should take it seriously. i know mr. chairman, you said this might be the wrong time to vote on a plan. it is the wrong time. we should have been voting back in march. that's what the house did. two years in a row the house has met its responsibility. they subjected themselves to be accountable to the american people. we refused to do that here in the senate. senator warner mentioned the word embarrassment. we should be embarrassed. the american people deserve far better. we need to provide some leadership in this country. americans hunger for leadership. and it's getting none. no proposal to save medicare.
1:23 pm
we've heard last year's budget lost 0-97 in the senate so unserious that not one member of the president's own party voted for it. now 0-14 in the house. the american people need to understand what an abdication of responsibility that is. what an abdication of leadership that is. how can they make a choice. they don't know what the other side is for. we know a few things the other side is for. they want to take over 1/6 of our economy. i guess they're okay with $5.3 trillion worth of deficits during the term of this president. i guess they're okay with 1.4, 1.3, another $1.3 trillion deficit the last four years.
1:24 pm
the total deficit will be about 30%. 30 cents of every dollar is what we are borrowing. the american people deserve far better. when you take a look at the president's budget that lost, he's going to add somewhere around $10 or $11 trillion to our debt. that doesn't even fully state the problem. one thing mr. chairman, that we share is i enjoy charts. i just want to in wrapping up here talk about three i think very significant additional risks that can explore the deficit further from what the president is proposing. first of all growth. the cbo said we could add $1.1 trillion to our nation's debt over the next ten years.
1:25 pm
$3.2 trillion. interest rates. here's my one chart i'll impose on you here. i took a look historically what the average borrowing cost oof is the united states has been. from 19 70 through 1999, we've had an average borrows cost of 5.3%. the last few years we've been borrowing at an unrealistically low 1.5%. during those 30 years our debt to gdp ratio was about 60%. we were far more credit worthy. now our debt to gdp ratio's over 100%. that's about a 4% gap from historic. 4 percentage points is $600 billion a year. that's a significant risk. of course ark few weeks ago we
1:26 pm
debated the health care law in the supreme court. let's hope that's overturned because that represents a significant deficit risk that nobody's acknowledging. if you take a look at real spending. not just the six years from the first ten-year budget window, but once obama care actually kicks in starting in 2016, over the next ten years we'll spend $2.4 trillion on that program. it's going to be paid for with roughly $500 billion worth of taxes, fees and penaltities and $500 billion worth of medicare cuts. we haven't enacted the sgr fix of $208 billion. because we realize that that will reduce access. what makes anybody believe will reduce medicare by $520 billion? move it forward ten years. if you grow that $500 million in fees and penalties that might
1:27 pm
grow to $800 billion versus $2.4 trillion in spending. that repts about $1.6 trillion deficit gap or $1.6 trillion you're going to have to cut from medicare. is that going to happen? and i'm not even mentioning i guess i am now, the cost when tens of millions of employers or employers will drop tens of millions of individuals from their employer sponsored care make them eligible for huge subsidies and exchanges. what's that going to cost? we've got some significant problems in this country. mr. chairman, i certainly appreciate your opening presentation laying out the case, but that doesn't even scratch the surface. we have far greater risks. we have one side in washington that refuses to take a vote. refuses to tell the american people what their solution is. until that side does that, until
1:28 pm
this pde to lead, we're not going to fix this problem. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the senator. senator coops is recognized for a statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for putting this plan in front of us and for having this session today. i apologize for my late arrival. i was chairing a subcommittee hearing in the foreign relations committee. when i'm home in delaware people ask me about the deficit and debt. people are used to in their families and businesses balance their budgets and live within their means. they expect our government to do the same. i could give a long speech of recounting how we got hoar and who's responsible for assigning blame and delivering a campaign speech. instead i'd rather focus on what
1:29 pm
i can i think we all have in common today around this table. in my previous role as a county executive my job was in large part to find ways to balance the budget every year to deal with record deficits to rein in spending and make unpopular and difficult decisions and deliver surplus. i know things are more difficult at the federal level and that our national debt at over $15 trillion which took us a decade to earn our way into presidents of both parties, congressing control by both parties will take us a way to work our way out of. i think we all agree from what i've gotten of the summary of the comments of many of you, our excess i have debt, our record debt hurt our economies, hurt our family, hurt our country. this is a ticking time bomb that needs to be addressed. we have budget caps as you've presented that give the appropriations committees guidance for this year and next and we need a plan and

79 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on