tv [untitled] March 2, 2011 1:45am-2:15am EST
1:45 am
live under the budget that spent what last year spent. we lived under that budget until this time. that budget saves $41 billion below what the administration asked for last february. the majority, about 10 days ago, passed a bill that said it wants to spend $100 billion less than what was proposed by the administration last february. now, logical people would say we're very well on the way to a sensible compromise. we're on track to save $41 billion below what was requested. the majority wishes to spend $100 billion less than that. i'm certain that talented legislators like the chairman, like mr. dicks, left to their own devices and leadership, can find a way to have us strike a middle ground for the rest of the fiscal year. i'm hoping that this is the last one of these temporary extensions we have so that those who rely upon the continuing fuppeding of
1:46 am
government departments, vendors, employees, and institutions, will be able to do so. i think it's fertile for a good compromise and i hope the house reaches it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from ohio, mr. austria. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. austria: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the chairman for yielding. i rise in support of this short-term continuing resolution which must be passed this week to avoid a shutdown of many important programs and services. our first priority today is job growth. that's why we're putting into place policies that will stop the runaway spending here in washington and help bring more certainty to our financial and bismarcks to grow our economy and create long-term, sustainable jobs. last week, i had the opportunity to visit the largest single site employer in the state of ohio,
1:47 am
wright-patterson air force base. i was told if the government shuts down, thousands of people may be asked not to come to work. and if we don't pass the short-term c.r. this is one place that would suffer from a shutdown which is responsible for numerous national defense programs that depend on continued funding. without funding, programs like this across the country will not get off the ground in a timely manner, may incur programmatic delays and costs, jeopardize the national defense programs they support and put thousands of jobs, including small businesses, on the line. we must d the responsible thing an pass the short-term resolution which will buy us time to find a long-termres. lugs to our budget crisis. madam speaker, people across america and especially in ohio have spoken very clearly that washington needs to cut spending. nobody said these cuts would be easy but they're absolutely essential to help put our country back on a fiscally sustainable path that will
1:48 am
create jobs an strengthen our economy for future yen rations. with the leadership of chairman rogers, this house has already passed a c.r. to help protect national defense but in addition to that, they made more than $100 billion in cuts. when we pass the short-term c.r., we'll pass another $4 billion in cuts. it's time for the nat to do their job and pass the c.r. and i urge my colleague to join me in supporting this short-term c.r., ensure we are listening to the american people by passing a c.r. that includes substantial cuts and will put us on a fiscally sustainable path forward. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of miz time -- his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield one minute -- i yield one minute to the distinguished democratic leader and former speaker, nancy pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the minority leader is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, ma'am. i thank the gentleman for yielding.
1:49 am
i thank him for yielding time and for presenting the dicks substitute, which was not allowed to come to the floor but nonetheless i salute him for his leadership in that regardful madam speaker, members of congress -- in that regard. madam speaker, members of congress agree on two things, we must move the process forward so the government does not shut down and we must reduce the deficit. as we do that, we must create jobs and help the middle class. that's where we may have some separation. we have, as distinguished ranking member mr. dicks said earlier, in december of 2010, congressional democrats and the president of the united states cut spending by $41 billion. $41 billion. on that day in december, only one republican voted for those
1:50 am
cuts. only one. february, two months later, republicans pass the spending bill that does not create jobs but in fact has been said to de-so-700,000 jobs. that's approximately 100,000 jobs a week since we passed our cut bill. february, 2011, republicans pass a spending will that reduces u.s. economic growth by 1 ppt 5% to 2%. now some have questioned, is it ealy as much as 700,000 jobs? is it really as much as $-- as 1.5% to 2%, but no one questions whether there will be job los or whether there will be slowing down of our economic growth among serious economists. we are going in the wrong direction.
1:51 am
how fast may be the question. but we are going in the wrong direction. that is why it's very important for us to proceed with great care and caution here because again, we have the opportunity to create jobs, to strengthen the middle class, and to do so in a way that is fiscally sound. when i hear our colleagues talk about the deficit and the immorality of a big deficit and i completely agree, we owe it to our children and our grandchildren not to leave them a debt. but all this talk about deficit is -- when we as democrats took the lead on for decades. do you remember, because many of you were here at the time, that when president clinton became president, he inherited an enormous debt he instituted pay as you go, he had an economic agreement passed in
1:52 am
the congress and the deficit began to reduce, $5.6 trillion in surplus. another president bush took office, pay as you go went out the window. and again the turnaround into growing deficits. so for all of this talk about the immorality of deficits, where were you when those deficits were instituted in the late 1980's? some of you were here. in the 2000's, many of you were here. again we have to take our country on a path of deficit reduction. many of you were here when the tax cuts for the high end were implemented, creating no jobs except increasing our deficit, sending the bill to our children, and the credit to the chinese government. how about when we did the
1:53 am
prescription drug bill, giving away the store to the pharmaceutical industry and the price tag to our children by increasing the deficit. how about two wars, unpaid for wars? god knows we will do anything to protect and defend our people, and i would hope that everybody subscribes to that. why would we have tax cuts for people at the highest end, why wouldn't they pay their fair share of protecting the american people and american interests and their interests wherever they may exist in the world? and so we had in the eight years of president bush's administration, a complete reversal, an $11 trillion swing, a $5.6 trillion in surplus to nearly $5 trillion in debt. and now people are saying, the national debt, it's an immorality to have these
1:54 am
deficits. we agree. that's why once again we must take our country down a path of deficit reduction. but -- but to do so in a way that is job creating and strengthening of the middle class. december, 2010, democrats cut $41 billion in spending, only one republican voted for that february, 2011, republicans pass a spending bill that could destroy 700,000 jobs and reduce , slow down, our g.d.p., our gross domestic product, by 1.5% to 2%. if you want to say it's going to beless than that, it's going to slow down less than that, it's still going in the wrong direction. mr. dicks, i commented on his proposal because in the bill that we had before -- that we have before us, we have a situation where the republicans
1:55 am
have stripped the bill of important initiatives for the education of our children. in fact, president obama made some of those cuts too. but he didn't do it in a way that hurt the children. what we -- what we debate today hurt ours future by taking money from those facing challenges without redirecting critical resources to meet the needs of our children. what mr. dicks proposed would have reversed that. he would have taken those programs away in a budget that would have redirected funds to other initiatives addressing these needs. if we do not, as a congress, understand that education is essential, is key to all of our success, key to all of our
1:56 am
success, then frankly, the american people are way ahead of us on that. that's why when we debated the bill before the break to see a quarter of a million children thrown off of head start and many teachers fired alongside that. that's not -- is that a smart cut? sure, we have to tighten our belts. but let's do it again in a very smart way. i just want to know where everybody was in the days when this deficit grew? in the eight years of the bush administration? that's why we are in the situation we are today. that's why we must again make some very difficult decisions. so what is before us today is a short-term, let's just keep the government open two weeks, so we use that time to do the right thing.
1:57 am
to use that time to have a reality check, a reality check on how we got these deficits in the first place and how tax cuts at the highest end that do not create jobs but increase the deficit are not the appropriate path to deficit reduction. how cutting education and therefore the innovation that goes wit and the strength of our children and our economy is afingted is not the way to do it. many people here have met much experience on the way to do it and they sit on both sides of the aisle. let's get through this today, recognizing the challenge that we have, understanding that this bill before us is not a good one, but it's not final. and recognizing that when we come together, we meet the three criteria, does it create jobs, does it strengthen the
1:58 am
middle class, does it reduce the deficit? because all of those who say that it's immoral for us to grow the deficit and pass those bills on to our children and grandchildren are right. i just don't want them to ignore the fact that we got here a certain way and please do not ask us to go down that path again. with the attitude that it is a morality for us to do the same fate again, ignoring again the tremendous, tremendous suffering of the american people and their need for jobs, ignoring thes a separation of our children and their need for education by making the cuts that are in heed -- that are in here. this is as serious a debate we can have in the congress of the united states. because it affects our children and their future. because the deficits have gotten
1:59 am
so far out of hand. i'm very proud of the fact that 30 years ago, well, 1982, well, 29 years ago, when democrats gathered in philadelphia for midterm conference, pay-as-you-go was placed on the agenda, passed as a resolution, became part of the democratic platform. fiscal responsibility is a part of who we are. our blue dog coalition -- is that you, mr. lewis? our blue dog coalition has had this as their mantra, pay-as-you-go, -- pay as you go, do not add to the deficit. if we all share that view we should all be able to come together, because the numbers will add up or they will not add up. and the bill for sure will be sent to our children and our grandchildrenment some of you
2:00 am
have children, some of you have children and grandchildren. would you ever dream of sending them a bill for a personal expense? if you were to leave them anything? would you leave them a bill? we cannot leave the children of america with any bills for any fiscal deficit either. it wouldn't be the right thing to do. but in order for us to do the right thing, it is time for a serious reality check. and that's the opportunity mr. dicks was giving us today, the rules committee rejected that, i hope that in the weeks ahead, depending on what happens here today, let's move on with it so we can spend whatever time it takes to do it right, nothing less is at stake than the economic security of our country , the well-being of our children , the well-being of our children and the confidence that the american people have in what we are sent here to do for them.
2:01 am
with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the minority leads back the balance of her time. the gentleman from kentucky. >> madam speaker, i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> to point out to the body that over the last two years, the congress went on a spending spree and increased spending by 84%. mr. rogers: in just two years. you ran the deficit up, the annual deficit, now two in a row, trillion-dollar-plus deficits a year, record breaking, we've never had that before, you've ran the debt up to now we're bouncing against the ceiling and the congress will be called upon to increase the debt ceiling. there were no appropriations bills passed last year at all, thus that's why we're here
2:02 am
today. so let's talk about the spending spree that we're trying to slow down and stop, madam speaker. with this bill. i yield back that time and yield two minutes, three minutes to the gentleman from georgia, a member of our committee, mr. graves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. graves: thank you, madam speaker. and i appreciate the chairman for clarifying some things that we just heard because i was at a loss, thinking i was going to need much more than three minutes to, you know, rewrite some of what we just heard there and correct the historical account of the last several years. we heard the la. ing and wailing today from -- lamenting and wailing today of the other side of the aisle and it's amazing to hear about why are we here, why are we in this position today? we're hearing government shutdown from the democrats, you're not hearing that from the republicans, you're hearing we need to reduce spending and cut the size of government. you hear, we're at the brink, we're about to shut down government and we have to
2:03 am
wonder, why are we here? the chairman brought it up so eloquently there a minute ago. when they were in the leadership last year, and it wasn't that long ago, one year ago, they had the opportunity, they had the opportunity to pass their own budget, they didn't do it. so instead they passed a c.r., c.r. went for about four or five weeks, wasn't enough. let's do another one, because, again, they could not pass a budget. passed another c.r. for two more weeks. again, that wasn't quite enough. so let's go three days, because we don't know how to pass a budget nor have an appropriations meeting. and then yet again, let's pass another one for just over two months. that is why we are here today, that is why the republicans are stepping up and leading, that is why the republicans passed a c.r. a few weeks ago cutting $100 billion. but yet again the democrats, they do not want to step up and lead at this time in our nation. so here we are again, the chairman of appropriations and
2:04 am
the republicans have stepped up and said, it's time to lead. so $2 billion a week in cuts, yes, that's what we're proposing, should it be more? sure, it should be more. to those who said we were cutting the wrong programs, i assure you, you'll have the chance doubt those programs because we will be cutting more. so this measure hopefully will pass both chambers, will avert the government shutdown and the question is then, what happens next? the american people want to know that. i want the american people no know this, that there are more -- to know this, that there are more spending cuts on the way. some of my colleagues on the other side, they'll say, you know, we don't need to cut spending, we've heard that, we heard that they want to freeze spending instead. which is akin to tying a brick to the accelerator this vehicle that's going off the cliff. it's status quo is what we're hearing from the other side. we heard a minute ago from the leader of the democrats, former speaker, and her quote was, they took the lead in deficits, oh,
2:05 am
is she so right. in fact, they have led three straight years of deficit spending, consecutive years, trillion-dollar deficits, and now $14 trillion debt. what leadership that is. the status quo is unacceptable, the american people deserve so much more. so, today let's stop that threat of the government shoutdown and let's -- shutdown and let's save the taxpayers $4 billion, let's come back and save them billions upon billions more. but let's get ready because deeper spending cuts are necessary and as we saw from that government accounting report, duplicative programs exist. madam speaker, it's time to eliminate some of those programs, continue eliminating portions of this government and get this fiscal house back on track. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the democratic whip and former majority leader,
2:06 am
who will help correct the record. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for five minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i've now heard, watched on television now, i've been on the floor with two members from georgia, both of whom are brand new to this body, who are talking about history. i want to tell my friend from georgia a little bit of history. i've ben here 30 years. i've -- i've been here 30 years. i've served some 20 of those years under republican presidents. every one of them has run a deficit of $100 billion or more. in fact, during that cumulative period of 30 years, notwithstanding the obama administration, i'll discuss that in a second, mr. reagan, mr. bush i and mr. bush ii ran deficits of over $6 trillion that they signed the bills to spend. over $6 trillion. bill clinton was president for eight years, the last four years we didn't raise the debt at all,
2:07 am
unlike every one of the republican administrations where we raised it on a regular basis. not at all during the last administration. the last four years of mr. clinton's. and he ran the only president in your lifetime, and mine and i'm older han -- than you are, a $69.2 billion surplus. look it up, no argument, but let me say something. irrespective of who's responsible, we are responsible for fixing it. republicans and democrats, the american people know that we have a crisis confronting us. they know there is no option other than to deal with this realistically. i would call everybody in this body, republican, democrat, liberal, conservatives, attention to an article that was written by david brooks today in "the new york times." read it. read it.
2:08 am
we all ought to read this, take it to heart. i call it to my conference's attention or caucus' attention this morning. our deep debt is a serious danger to our economy. to our future and our children's opportunities. the american people want us to bring the debt down, they said so very loudly. and i doubt there's a member who disagrees. democrats believe that spending cuts are part of the solution, let there be no mistake. we need to cut spending. but we also believe that those cuts must be smart and targeted, not pegged to an arbitrary number. one of your staffers, when you put the pledge to america, came forth with a figure, $100 billion. that's a nice, round figure. $100 billion sounds good. good p.r., good spin, $100 billion. read david brooks, no ta
2:09 am
analysis was given to that figure, no figures were held on that figure. nobody could testify on the cuts that were proposed to reach that figure. we have to cut the spending, we can do without some spending. not the vital investments, however, that are helping to grow our economy, helping our private sector innovate and creating the jobs of the future. during the clinton administration i will tell my young friend from georgia, 22 million new jobs. during the bush administration we lost eight million jobs. 30 million job turnaround. that's why there was so much spending on which mr. rogers spoke. $700 billion of that was asked for by the bush presidency, secretary paulson and mr. bernanke. so that we didn't fall into a depression for the first time since herbert hoover. this president has been trying to bring us out and frankly is succeeding. unfortunately the republicans
2:10 am
passed a spending bill full of short-sighted and indiscriminant cuts. do we need cuts, yes. do we need short-sighted and indiscriminant cuts, no. just over a week ago you would cut billions in energy and medical research, kick 200,000 children out of head start, make college more expensive and stop 21st century infrastructure projects in 40 states. that's what mr. zandi was talking about, that's what goldman sachs is talking about. cuts like these could cripple america's competitiveness and job growth. according to moody's analytics' chief economist mark zandi, republican cuts would cost america a total of 700,000 jobs. the economic policy institute puts it at 800,000. rather than such job destroying policies, both of us, both parties need to come together and reason together. frankly the american public
2:11 am
doesn't care who works with whom, they just want it to work. this is no way to fund the largest enterprise in the world on 14 day cycles. the gentleman criticized us for doing it. we should have been criticized, but let me tell my friend when he didn't mention, one of the reasons we did it, can i have an additional minute? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one additional minute. mr. hoyer: we could not get 60 votes in the united states senate. in order to move a bill forward. keeping our government running is vital to our economy. none of us should want to shut down the government. it is also vital to the millions who rely on government every day , the sooner we can agree on a long-term package of smart cuts, not reckless, arbitrary job-destroying cut, the sooner we can stop funding the government in disruptive two-week incements.
2:12 am
the gentleman was correct, we ought not to do that. we need to pass a seven-month funding so the government and all who rely on the government, who work for the government, who have contracts with the government, can rely on some certainty. you've talked a lot about certainty on your side of the aisle. you're absolutely right. we need certainty. the business community needs certainty. individuals need certainty. and the government needs certainty. rather than passing two-week continuing resolutions, i urge republicans and democrats to work together on a long-term solution in this case, long-term is seven months. to reduce spending, to help balance our budget and to try to bring rashality to this process -- rationality to this process. we cannot, my friends on the republican side of the aisle and the democratic side of the aisle, continue to look at 15% of the budget and expect us to get to where we need to be from
2:13 am
where we now are. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: may i inquire of the time remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from washington has four minutes remaining. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to a brand new member of the committee, the gentleman from kansas, mr. yoder. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. yoder: thank you, madam speaker. we can debate who is at fault but i think we have an agreement. with record deficits and debt, coupled with 20 months straight unemployment, of 9% unemployment, it is time for us to get serious about the crushing affect of our runaway debt that is having on our economy. as speaker boehner has said, just like a bankrupt business can't create jobs, a bankrupt country can't create jobs. . it's not democrats
2:14 am
or republicans but families and individuals and business owners, they are the casualties of this government spending spree and we are at a crossroads. reasonable spending reductions or head towards crushing deficits. the tax increases that will be needed to alleviate would wipe out individuals and family businesses. current income tax rates would need to double across the board to close the deficits of this administration. you can't create jobs under these devastating taxes. we must reduce spending. we have a choice as the american people. we can choose prosperity, lower taxes and reduced debt or go the other direction and choose record-breaking deficits. we have a choice to make today and it's my hope that members will choose to keep government open and make modest reductions open and make modest reductions an
187 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on