here down through the years. if you look around and take an objective view, you know the only way to bring legitimate control to the irresponsible fiscal behavior of washington, d.c., the only way to restore the integrity of this chamber, to restore the confidence in the people we serve is to make it constitutional, a balanced budget amendment. no gimmicks, mr. speaker, no hollowed promises, simple language that simple americans can wrap their heads around, a constitutional amendment for this country to balance its books. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. . mr. garrett: at this time, the gentleman from tennessee, from -- there he is. from georgia for one minute, please. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is

recognized -- mr. kingston: can i have 30 seconds for the long stay? can i get a minute and a half? mr. garrett: we will yield main and a half. mr. kingston: i thank the gentleman from new york. i appreciate my friend from new jersey. during this eight years as president, president bush increased the national debt $3 trillion. we spent too much money. but not to be outdone in a three-year period of time president obama has increased the national debt $5 trillion, a 56% increase. and then he turns around and lectures middle class american families struggleing -- families, struggling families to eat their peas. he offers nothing but a phony budget that even failed in the democrat-controlled senate 97-0. harry reid voted against his budget. the president owns this economy. not cheney, not george bush,

it's the president. he owns the skyrocketing debt, he owns the 15 million unemployed, he owns the failed stimulus plan. president obama owns the extended bush tax cuts because it was him who extended them two years. and now in our time of great fiscal crisis, when america needs leadership, he's absent. the republicans in the house are offering a plan and i understand the democrats don't like it, that's good because sometimes the two parties have to battle it out and you get a better product from it. but you can't do it when the democrats aren't offering a plan. we will pass this plan today and i hope harry reid and the democrats will pass the plan and we can get together and i hope the president decides to offer a plan and maybe we can look at his and maybe out of the three possibilities we can do what's best for the american people, but we can't do it unless the president decides to engage and take on the role of leader and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. once again the president had a plan to reduce the deficit by about $4 trillion over 10 years, $3 in cuts, $1 in revenue, our republican colleagues walked away from the table because they didn't want to ask $1 of deficit reduction from closing special interest tax loopholes. with that i yield three minutes and 15 seconds to the distinguished member of the judiciary committee, mr. nadler. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, many of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle would not be here today if president jefferson had not borrowed to finance the louisiana purchase purchase. -- purchase. mr. speaker, this bill promises all the fun of a constitutional amendment without actually amending the constitution. it simply says that the united states should default on our debts and destroy our economy if we don't amend the constitution. if we default on our debts we will do more damage to our

economy than large deficits, tax increases and da conian cuts combine -- draconian cuts combined. right now we enjoy low interest rase rates because we're the most stable, reliable country in the world. even though we are certainly wealthy enough to pay our debts, nothing else will matter. interest rates will climb, homeowners and businesses will be pushed out of the credit markets, the stock market will crash. never before in the history of this country has anyone been irresponsible enough to play chicken with our full faith and credit. never. we know how to balance the budget because we've done it before. in the not too distant past we managed working with president clinton not only to balance the budget but to run surpluses an begin paying down the debt. unfortunately president bush and the republican congress managed to turn record surpluses into record deficits in record time. rather than admit to serious republican economic mismanagement and finding responsible solutions, we get this dusted-off thing from the

past. the one that abolishes medicare and turns medicaid into a block grant. i ask the sponsor of the balanced budget amendment, the gentleman from virginia, how he thought this could be done? he answered that the republican study committee budget, which is even more radical than the ryan budget, would be in balance in just nine years. that's what we're voting for today. an accelerated version of the republican study committee budget. anyone voting for this should be prepared to go home and explain that vote including republican members who voted against the study committee budget. economists have long known that in good times you should balance the budget and pay down the debt but that in times of recession when tax revenues plummet and the economy contrasts you have to spend money in unemployment and to put people back to work. you must run a deficit to get the economy going again. the balanced budget amendment would force us to do the exact opposite and turn every recession into a depression. and this constitutional amendment, there's a whole lot more than a required balanced

budget. many of its provisions cement into the constitution the policy preferences of the current majority and bind our children and grandchildren to those preferences. the 2/3 requirement for example to increase revenues would have the effect of allowing special interest tax loopholes to be slipped into law with a majority vote but would require a soup mar jort to reveal them -- a super majority to repeal them. the amendment would also require a 2/3 vote for any budget that exceeds 18% of g.d.p. the c.b.o. tells us that outlays of average of close to 21% of g.d.p. over the past 20 years. it did not drop below 18% since 1966. that is since the enactment of medicare. regardless of what other parts of this bill may say, there is no way to meet these restrictions without destroying medicare, medicaid, social security, veterans programs and military preparedness. can i have another 15 seconds? mr. van hollen: i yield to the gentleman 10 seconds.

mr. nadler: thank you. no amount of rhetoric will change it. the real problems that tax revenues have declined from 20.5% of g.d.p. in 2000 to 14% of g.d.p. because we no longer tax the millionaires, the billionaires and the large corporations the way we used to. let's start doing that and we can have a balanced budget without writing any constitutional amendments which promise balanced budgets without showing how they do protect the millionaires from paying their fair share. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: we're also reminded that jefferson said that the principle of spending money today that we don't have be paid for by posterity is but swindling future generations. something this republican party does not wish to do. with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, mr. johnson. mr. johnson: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 2560, the cut, cap and balance act. last november the american people sent a clear and resounding message -- cut off the nation's credit card and

stop spending money we don't have. today we're doing that. this act makes immediate spending cuts and forces the federal government to do what americans all over this country are doing, living within their means. this legislation also begins to cap federal government spending at levels that are historically sustainable to ensure vibrant economic growth. finally this measure forces the federal government to do what to most americans is simply plain, common sense. spend only the amount of money that you have. a balanced budget amendment is long overdue. republicans have heard the american people's call to action to reduce spending and that is why i strongly support this measure. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the cut, cap and balance act and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time.

the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas and that's just the way it is. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today in support of the cut, cap and balance act because american families deserve to have a government that lives within its means just like they do. our national debt has grown in excess of $14 trillion, that's more than $46,000 for every man, woman and child in this country. and we continue to borrow roughly 40 cents of every dollar we spend. this is a path to financial ruin, we will leave the next generation with a less prosperous america than the one we inherited. mr. roe: balancing our budget would have a devastating affect on our economy. it's hard to believe. the cut, cap and balance act keeps the promise to cut spending while also granting the president's request for a debt limit increase. by cutting spending $111 billion the first year alone, capping future spending and laying the groundwork for a balanced budget amendment, this package will save $5.8 trillion over the next

10 years. this bill is nothing more than good, old-fashioned common sense and i urge my colleagues to support this. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee yields back the baffle his time. without objection, the gentleman from -- balance of his time. without objection, the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran, will control the time on the minority. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. moran: we will reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. scalise. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana. mr. scalise: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of cut, cap and balance and if you look at what american families have been telling us for the last few years, during these tough economic times what they've been doing is they've been cutting back, they've been tightingen -- tightening their belts and they sit around the kitchen table and figure out how to balance their budget and live within their means and yet today on the other side all you've seen is a parade of members coming criticizing the concept of a balanced budget. actually calling it extreme, radical. imagine that. only a big spending washington

liberal could think it would be radical to require washington to start living within its means like families have been doing for years. and so frankly american families would say it's about time, welcome to the party. and instead some people think you can just live in this fantasy land where you can keep tax, taxing, spending, borrowing money from china and act like the day of wreckening never is never going to come and kick the -- wrenging is never going to come and kick the can down the road. it's time to say enough is new. we're going to deal with our problems nod. we're going to set priorities today and do the tough things people sent us to do and that means cutting, capping and balancing the federal budget. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. without objection, the gentleman from maryland is back and is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. again, the choice is not whether we put in place a plan to reduce the deficit and balance the budget. the issue is how we do that. that is the difference here.

with that i would reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: the gentleman from ohio for one minute is recognized. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, mr. gibbs. mr. gibbs: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in strong support of cut, cap and balance. out-of-control spending in the federal government has driven our country to the brick of -- brink of financial meltdown. our nation's debt crisis was easily predictable. in recent years america has watched as the side of the federal government has ballooned and deficit spending reached dangerous levels. and yet warnings from congress, congress stuck with business as usual, more spending, more regulations and bigger government. it's time to put an end to business as usual for the good of the country. our country needs it, the american people demand it and the future of our grandchildren depend on it. this legislation puts us on a path of fiscal responsibility, brings certainty and will restore private sector confidence. the naysayers say we can't do this, they argue for tax increases on our job creators. this will unleash the private sector and result in more

revenues to ensure strength and social security -- strength in social security and other programs. just raising the debt ceiling without spending cut reforms, according to moody's and standard&poors will lead to a down grade of u.s. paper and a downyield spiral, higher interest rates, higher taxes and less opportunities. i urge the support of this and cut spending now instead of six to 10 years from now. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from florida who the white house says that leadership is not simply proposing a bill to vote up or down, we recognize that the white house is not giving us any plan of leadership so far in this issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. >> i ask unanimous consent that my speech be made part of the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> it's been said before that the united states government owes close to $14.3 trillion. it's estimated by the c.b.o.

reveals that by the year 2021 the government will spend 100% of every dollar in revenue on entitlements, simply raising the debt limit to $16.3 trillion without comparable spending reduction is irresponsible at best and catastrophic for our nation and worse. mr. stearns: facing our nation's debt onto the backs of our country's children and grandchildren is irresponsible. comparable reductions would be in the amount of $2 trillion. but as that does not even cover the interest on the debt, a $4 trillion spending reduction would be appropriate. and that's what we should be working on. today we must ask ourselves, is this blessed country of ours disciplined enough to solve the debt problem through austerity and productivity? i think we can. i believe we can. but only if we break from the tradition of spending and raising our debt limit. instead we must pass h.r. 2560.

the cut, cap and balance act. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from north dakota. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north dakota. >> thank you, mr. speaker. we've been down this road before. our country faces unprecedented debt. bergburg the house has worked to cut spending and reduce the -- mr. berg: the house has worked to cut spend and reduce the deficit but the obama administration would rather raise taxes and mislead americans with scare tactics rather than support these commonsense solutions. . we cannot do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. americans have tightened their belts and have made the tough choices. it's time for washington to do the same. our financial situation is a mess. it's going to be a long road to get our country back on track.

but it's clear we can begin right here. we need to cut the spending. we need to cap the growth in government and we need to balance the budget. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i would remind my colleagues that this provision they're talking about, the constitutional proposal that came out of the judiciary committee would prohibit the congress from balancing the budget at 13% of g.d.p. expenditures. it would say you cannot not make that choice. it would say you have to reach a 2/3 hurdle to reduce the special interest tax breaks for the purpose of deficit reduction. we keep hearing about this balanced budget amendment without any mention from our colleagues that they put these two devices into the constitution that would limit our ability to balance the budget in a balanced way. and with that, i reserve.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: would that we have the problem of this congress the last two years trying to balance the budget, stimulus spending, obamacare and the budget deficit should we look to the other side of the aisle? that's not the case. and that's the reason why the need to try and constrain our spending, legislative caps tomorrow and going forward in the future with a constitutional balanced budget amendment. i yield one minute to the gentlelady from north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina. mrs. myrick: the possible default of the federal government presents a near term problem that could have disastrous effects on the short-term, on our economy.

but the bigger problem is long-term, because washington has been spending too much money for too darn long. borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend, most of it from china. this bill cuts spending, cap and then balance the budget is something that needs to be done and we can't keep kicking the can down the road. you have heard it before, but it's true. the responsibility is on us to do the right thing for tomorrow for our families and everybody else. we balanced the budget almost some years ago. it's not impossible. it can be done if we have the courage to do it. 49 out of 50 states do it. so we need to remember there's no such thing as government money. it's the taxpayers' money and it's our job to be responsible stewards and we need to step up and take responsibility and pass this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland.

mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. speaker. that's right, during the clinton administration when they took a balanced approach, we did run surpluses and i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank the distinguished member of the budget committee as well for the great work that he has been doing. as i listen to my friends discuss this question of being responsible, i want to at least announce breaking news that our friends in the other body have come up with a semi-solution on revenue and on the question of

how we would cut. they are seeking to be responsible. and today in this body, we are not. i heard a tutorial about the green light and red light, which as you are a member, green is yes, and no comes up red. what the red will mean is to stop the insanity, to stop the loss of our moral compass, the responsibility to pay our bills. what the red light will mean is that we, in fact, would be not paying the bills of our family. we wouldn't be paying social security. interest rates will spike. the u.s. dollars would decline and our credit would literally go out the door. that's what being without responsibility is what we are

planning to do. then, if i could have the other one, please. then we will lose the ability to pay our medicare. and so don't be fooled by the green light tutorial. we frankly are going to lose our way. we'll close hospitals and won't have the ability to provide for our seniors and these are the very persons that my colleagues over here believe they are helping. but the main point i want to emphasize very quickly is that the constitution of the united states already says that the validity of the public debt of the united states in the 14 amendment section 4, shall not be questioned. let me tell you today that a balanced budget amendment will destroy the united states and will not allow us to pay for those in need. tap dance, losers' club,. that's what this bill is.

tap dance, losers' club and bust the benefits. the speaker pro tempore: members are advised to heed the gavel and concede the time yielded by the managers of the floor. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: what the leader on the other side said, whether members have read the bill. if they did read, cut, cap and balance actually does those three things and allows us to pay the bills at the same time. with that, i yield one minute to the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. >> mr. speaker, for the last 30 years, i have spent my life as a husband, small business owner and legislator. common sense is not so common here in washington, d.c. as a husband, it would be irresponsible to buy a new car or boat if my family couldn't make food payments or mortgage

payments. i didn't raise revenues on my customers, i cut back my expenses. as a legislator, we can operate a state and you don't see floridians running on the street. you see florida living within its means. those opposed to this plan are frightend and they know any cuts agreed to and a balanced budget and know it brings spending reductions and force government in the future to get an agreement of the whole family. a balanced budget amendment is common sense sm the american people are watching and their patience is wearing thin. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey has 2 1/2 minutes left. mr. garrett: yield one minute, please.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. with a record debt level of $14.2 trillion and unemployment at 9.2% and spending out of control, americans are searching for answers, a plan that will give them hope, a lifeline. the cut, cap and balance act is that lifeline. it is a simple plan with guaranteed results. raising the debt ceiling without serious spending reforms would be nothing but a green light for president obama for his failed spending problems and more tax hikes and more crushing debt. the president's policy has us borrowing 40 cents on every dollar. this will jeopardize our children's futures. and we must take action to solve our debt problems. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. by making immediate cuts and bringing federal spending in line with historic averages, we can promote job growth, sustain

our nation's economic viability and ensure that our nation is secure. let's throw americans a lifeline and vote yes on the cut, cap and balance act. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: it does not throw americans a lifeline to write into the united states constitution a preference for cutting medicare and social security, or over subsidies for oil companies. with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey has 90 seconds remaining. mr. garrett: i yield to the gentleman from texas for a minute and we'll see how he contains himself within that time. mr. barton: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. mr. barton: i was here back in

1995. i have one of the most conservative voting records in the house over the last 25 years. common sense tells you that our budget problem today is a spending problem, not a revenue problem. and as the first law of ditch digging says, when you are digging a hole, you have to stop digging deeper. president obama's budget does not have a budget deficit of less than half a trillion dollars over a 10-year period. cut, cap and balance may have some technical issues with it, but the basic premise is sound. we need to spend less money short-term this year, we need to spend less money in the next five years and we need a constitutional amendment that locks into place that over time we have to balance our budget every year unless there is some act of war or national emergency going on, 2/3 vote to override. vote for this bill later this

evening. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey has 30 seconds. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i yield one minute to the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman doesn't have a minute. the gentleman from has 30 seconds. mr. garrett: yield the remaining three 30 seconds. mr. duncan: one problem, my colleagues have never signed the front of a pay check. as a small town banker, i practiced character, capacity, capital, collateral and cash flow. if our country was held to these same standards, president obama would never get the loan he is asking for. i struggled on this vote because of the $14 trillion of debt that our nation faces. president obama has yet to come up with a plan that changes our spending trajectory. it's not just any plan, but

revolutionary reform the way congress spends money. we aren't $14 trillion because we tax americans too little, but congress has spent too much. reforms like a balanced budget amendment coupled with spending caps -- mr. garrett: i ask unanimous consent to reclaim the time for mr. jordan for the next half hour. and with that, i yield the gentleman -- the speaker pro tempore: hold on a second. are you seeking unanimous consent to control mr. jordan's time? and does mr. jordan know that? mr. garrett: i withdraw that unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio controls 30 minutes. you want to yield some time to our friend.

mr. jordan: i yield to my friend from south carolina. mr. duncan: i thank the gentleman from ohio for that. reforms like a balanced budget amendment coupled with spending cuts that can prevent our children and grandchildren from inheritting mountains of debt. passing off the problem to them may be the easy way but not the american way or the christian way. as president reagan said you and i as individuals can by borrowing, live beyond our means, but only for a limited period of time. why should we think that collectively as a nation we are not bound by that same limitation. we must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i would point out that when ronald reagan was president he raised the debt ceiling 17 times and specifically wrote to the congress saying that failure to

pay our bills would jeopardize the credit worthyness of the united states. president reagan didn't want to make that mistake. i yield one minute to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fattah. mr. fattah: it's not what we know, it's what we know that just isn't so. first and foremost, when we look at the constitution of the united states and we look at article 1 when we deal with the legislature, among the powers granted to the legislature, the first one is to borrow on credit on behalf of the united states. founding fathers had no notion we would be borrowing and wouldn't have this as the first enumerated power of the legislature. let's deal with this misinformation that has been on

the floor. most families have to balance their budgets? no. they have mortgages. they don't wait until they are homeless and go to the bank. they borrow so they can have a home. they don't wait until they need a car, they borrow the money to have the car. most businesses balance their budgets. the manufacturers aren't waiting for their machines to fall apart to recapitalize their businesses. we need to stop dealing in falsehoods and know that our country, greatest superpower has to act in a responsible way and i encourage a no vote. . . >> i yield to mr. landry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana. mr. landry: mr. speaker, i rise in favor of h.r. 2560. we need to set the record straight, see, the president said we don't need a constitutional amendment to make

government do its job. i don't see why he cares. he normally ignores the constitution most of the time. he says he will veto this bill if it comes to his desk. well, he can go ahead and veto it but if he does it is he who is choosing our seniors over everyone else. it is he who is choosing not to move america forward. let's look at the record. house republicans reluctantly passed the c.r. which was diluted by him and the senate. we passed a budget, something the senate hasn't done in 811 days and something the last congress didn't do in the last year of the last congress. i'm sorry if they don't like our plan. but the president hasn't even put up a plan. he gives us no choice. so, no, mr. president, we don't need a balanced budget amendment but you do. therefore i urge my colleagues to rise and support cut, cap and balance. i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has a plethora of advisors. first of all, members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not to -- others in the second -- and not to others in the second person, also, disparaging remarks directed at the president of the united states are inappropriate. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from ohio. >> mr. speaker, i would yield one minute to the gentlelady from west virginia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you. mr. speaker, we're broke. everyone from the small business person to s&p 500 is looking to washington to solve this mess. we have a responsibility to demonstrate that we can responsibly raise the debt ceiling by changing the way washington treats the taxpayers' dollars. the reason we're in over our heads is not because we're taxed too little, it's because we spend too much. the bill before us today, cut, cap and balance, is a tangible idea that demonstrates we have to pay our bills while making

sure our future credit card statements are not budget-busting. if we want to protect our seniors and grandchildren, encourage small business and create jobs and safeguard the american dream, we need to get our economy back on track. that starts with living within our means. it's about time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: mr. speaker, can i inquire, i don't know -- are we pretty close in time so it's fine for us to keep going? the speaker pro tempore: it's fine for to you keep going -- to keep going. the gentleman from ohio has 28 3/4 minutes and after that we have mr. ryan with 30 minutes and the minority has 43 1/4. mr. jordan: ok. i yield to the gentleman from illinois, mr. hultgren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. how much time. one minute. mr. hultgren: mr. speaker, the american people know that washington has a massive spending and debt problem that threatens not only our nation's credit rating but our fiscal

future. as a father of four, i understand the threat our nation's fiscal crisis poses to them and to others in their generation. a child born today inherits more than $45,000 of debt, an astounding and terrifying statistic. it's clear congress needs to cut spending to ensure that america remains strong and prosperous for future generations. we must fight both the threat of downgrade and the threat of default. this commonsense bill provides a guide to doing just that, without raising taxes on job creators. we must force this government to live within its means, preserve our nation's stearling credit rating and fight for a brighting future for our kids and grandkids. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the cut, cap and balance bill and send it to the senate with the strongest possible support. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland.

mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i still fail to see how it helps our kids and helps our seniors to write into the constitution of the united states a bias in favor of cutting medicare and cutting social security and cutting education before cutting special interest tax breaks, they would require only a majority to cut social security and medicare but 2/3 to get rid of special interest tax breaks for the purpose of reducing the deficit. that's why this is a question of priorities and a question of balance, how do we reduce the deficit, how do we get it into balance? with that i yield a minute and a half to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. maloney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. mrs. maloney: i thank the gentleman for his leadership and for pointing out the priorities and the focus and the injustice and unfairness of the republicans' proposal. as -- at a time when congress should be laser-focused on finding new ways to grow our economy and create american jobs we find ourselves once again

bauged down in producing the republican version -- bogged down in producing the republican version of waiting for the dough. we know that this bill will never become law, that it's going nowhere in the senate. their slash and burn cuts have not created a single job for hardworking middle class families and in fact most economists say that cutting too deeply, too strongly would hinder economic recovery and could return us to a recession. for the average american family the republican proposal would mean a cut in their future prospects, a cap on their dreams for tomorrow and balancing the budget on the backs of america's seniors while they refuse to even look at cutting a special interest tax break or subsidy. they continue to subsidize companies that send our jobs

overseas and subsidize record breaking profits that our oil companies have but they're subsidizing some of them to the tune of 40%. the republicans have brought us to the brink of a national default in an effort to force the american people to accept their ideological agenda. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: thank you, mr. chairman. before yielding 15 seconds to the gentleman from indiana, let me just say this. there's no chance this will pass the senate, how do we know? we don't know until we send it over there. maybe harry reid will have the courage to bring it up on the floor. we don't know. you know what? every friday night when they get ready to play the game, there's always one team that's favored. maybe heavily favored. but they still kick the ball off, they still play the game and sometimes the underdog wins. in fact, anything of real magnitude that's ever happened, the conventional wisdom was it can't happen.

so how do we know? i'm sick of this argument, it can't happen in the senate. we don't know that. if the conventional wisdom always won out there wouldn't be a united states of america. this is one of those historic moments and to say this thing can't pass the senate is just plain wrong. just plain wrong. i yield now 15 seconds to -- i'd be happy to yield. >> as you know this requires that we later pass a constitutional amendment. mr. van hollen: in fact, between now and august 2 we have to pass a constitutional amendment which of course requires 2/3 in the house, we'll find out by later this evening whether or not this bill will even get 2/3 in the house. mr. jordan: i think it's going to get 218, we'll send it to the senate. at some point maybe we'll get 2/3. that's our whole goal. mr. van hollen: this bill says you cannot -- you can't continue to pay the bills unless between now and august 2 or whenever -- mr. jordan: i know what it says. mr. van hollen: with the provisions you have in here.

so it will be a test today where you -- whether you can get the 2/3 to change the constitution in the ways you're talking about. mr. jordan: reclaiming my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time is controlled by the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: is the gentleman from maryland suggesting if there's some changes made to the balanced budget amendment in our legislation that there would be 50 votes in the house to support it on your side? mr. van hollen: i've already indicated that there's a conversation to be had with respect to what's a reasonable approach but that is absolutely not what we're dealing with in this particular bill. the fact is you've got -- mr. jordan: reclaiming my time. what you're say something you think the balanced budget amendment is a good idea and something we need. mr. van hollen: we believe, as the president said, the best way for to us balance the budget is to get together and hammer out a deal sooner rather than later. mr. jordan: that's really worked well over the last 30 years. i yield to the gentleman from indiana. mr. burton: mr. speaker, the american people who may be

paying attention to this whole debate may be confused. let me sum it up in one sentence them. want to spend more, they want to tax more and we don't. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, if what the gentleman's say something that we think we should get rid of a lot of the pork barrel spending in the tax code, whether it's oil subsidies or whether it's for corporate jets, yeah, we think we should get rid of some of that stuff for the purpose of reduce -- for the purpose of reducing the deficit. mr. jordan: would the gentleman yield for a question? mr. van hollen: we have a lot less time. really, otherwise i would. cot speaker tell us how much time is on either side? mr. jordan: quick question. joip excuse me. the gentlelady from ohio has 23 3/4 minutes and the gentleman from maryland has 401 1/2 and --

40 1/2 and then there's an additional 30 minutes for mr. ryan on the majority side. mr. van hollen: i'll have to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: one minute to the gentleman from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin for a minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. we've had a great debate here on cut, cap and balance. all the points have been made, but i sit here and listen to this debate, mr. speaker, i can't help but notice the hypocrisy. we're dealing with the other side who is the advocate of three wars, they have a $1 trillion stimulus bill, a $1 trillion obamacare and they don't want to come to the table and have a conversation about how we're going to reduce spending in the u.s. government. and then we hear all this conversation about tax loopholes. well, welcome to the party. mr. speaker, two months ago we had a bill on the floor where we did away with all of these loopholes and reformed the tax codes. mr. duffy: and they did nothing to support that reform. and now they demagogue our plan again. we hear about sending jobs overseas, well, jobs are going

overseas because we're taxing our businesses too much. when you tax them too much, they go other places and when they go other places like china, india, mexico, vietnam, they take our jobs with them. i've heard a lot about medicare. the only party in this house who has cut medicare is the democrat party. $500 billion out of medicare in an ipab bill that is going to ration care for our seniors. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would remind members to heed the gavel. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i would urge my colleagues to look at the congressional budget office analysis of the impact of the republican budget on senior citizens on medicare. essentially what they do is give seniors a raw deal compared to what members of congress get themselves. anda raw deal in a big way. -- a raw deal in a big way. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: yield one minute to dr. fleming.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana. mr. fleming: thank you. mr. speaker, but for the president of the united states who serves today and a democrat-controlled congress over the last two years we wouldn't be here today debating this. $3.8 trillion added to our debt and continuing on that same glide path. mr. speaker, we're here today because people across america, businesses, cities, states, all have to balance their budgets. the only game in this country, the only entity that doesn't have to balance its budget is the federal government. and that's what's ruining our economy. so all we're asking for in this bill is simply to immediately cut $111 billion in fiscal 2012, begin capping our spending rates, bringing it down to what's traditional, 18%, and then finally passing a balanced budget amendment that will finally put the restraints on

this body, on the president of the united states and certainly on the senate, finally so we will begin to do the people's work and we allow this economy to flourish once again. thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: yield two minutes to the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida for two minutes. . >> every second of every day, washington adds another $40,000 to our national debt, $40,000. in fact, by the time i finish speaking this sentence, our national debt will increase another $360,000, $360,000 in one septemberens. we have reached the edge of a cliff and it's going to take tough decisions and responsible

leadership to eliminate this massive, massive debt. i rise in support of h.r. 2560, the cut, cap and balance act of 2011. i support it because it's right, not because it's a republican plan, but because it's a commonsense plan. it's the american family plan. every american family cuts their budget, caps their budget, balances their budget with their own finances, so should washington. that is not unfair. to argue against this is to argue against common sense. this is to say as bad parents do, do as i say, not as i do. that is bad parenting and that's also bad legislation. unfortunately, over the past three months, our efforts to get serious about this crisis has been meant with scare tactics. enough, enough of the political parlor tricks coming out of this city. it is time for us to do the job that the american people sent us

here to do, practice, walking-around common sense. that's what my grandfather taught me, it is good in small business and good enough for washington d.c. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, american families don't have the luxury of saying if we don't get things 100% our way, we won't pay our family bills. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. chabot. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. chabot: our national unemployment rate is stuck at over 9%. we are currently borrowing 43 cents on every dollar that's spent around here and our national debt stands at a staggering $14.5 trillion. the american people are demanding that we in congress provide real solutions to these serious problems. the cut, cap and balance act does such that.

the debate is not whether we should make dep good on our current obligations. we must pay our bills. but the spending in washington is out of control and it's got to stop. and we have to cap future spending and passing a balanced budget amendment is critical to doing that, because let's face it, historically congress has shown no will or the ability to stop its addiction to spending. right now back in my district in cincinnati, hard-working americans are making tough decisions and making sacrifices to pay their bills. they expect us to do the same. let's dot right thing and pass this critical bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona arizona, mr. flake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. flake: has been a fascinating debate.

members on both sides of the aisle claim moral superiority to the debt that we have accumulated. there is plenty of blame to go around. when the republicans had the majority in both the house and the senate and republican in the white house, we behaved badly. no child left behind, the prescription drug benefit, bloated farm bills, swollen highway bills, bridges to no where, pork everywhere. let's be honest, we were headed towards this fiscal cliff long before the president took the wheel. so here we are today, mr. speaker. it matters little who drove what shift, what matters is that we, both parties, are teatering on the fiscal cliff getting ready to drag the country into the abyss. fortunately, the 2006 mid-term election sent us on a doe tour to the road to damascus and we are here with a cut, cap and balance plan that will put us back on sure financial footing.

if the other side of the aisle has a plan that does not entail the same behavior, we should consider that plan. to date, we have seen no such plan. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this cut, cap and balance legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i agree with a lot of what the gentleman has said. the president has put a plan on the table to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years. it does it with 3,000 spending cuts to $1 in revenue. that approach was rejected by our colleagues. and i reserve the balance of our time. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: you know why it was rejected? it's the same old game. exactly the same old game. the cuts come in the out-years and taxes come now and here we go again. there is no specifics to it.

i yield now -- mr. van hollen: would the gentleman yield? mr. jordan: i yield now to the gentleman from illinois one minute. -- three minutes, i'm sorry. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding and thank you, mr. speaker. i sit back and as we're watching the debate today, i have to take my hat off to the gentleman from maryland who i think has the toughest job in the whole chamber, mr. speaker, and that is, he is basically today the lawyer for the status quo. mr. roskam: and that's a tough job. a tough argument to make. no matter how thoughtful the arguments have been on this side of the aisle that there is an urgency -- mr. van hollen: would the gentleman yield? mr. roskam: i will at the end. no matter how urgent the argument is, no matter how

jarring the unemployment figures are at 9.2%, no matter what the rating agencies are saying, the gentleman is saying, there is a better plan. but i would submit that there is no better plan. there is no more balanced plan than cut, cap and balance. most americans that are listening to this debate, they are hearing washington, d.c., saying hold the line, lash ourselves to the mass and we will get around the cape if we stick to the current course. the current course is a failure. nobody can defend the status quo with a straight face. this majority has come up and said ok, there is a pathway forward and the pathway forward is immediate, short-term and long-term. and i don't see what the argument is. i will be happy to yield to the gentleman.

mr. van hollen: if what you mean by protecting the status quo is that i'm opposed to actually manipulating the constitution of the united states to make it harder to reduce special interest tax breaks, yeah, i don't think we should change the constitution. mr. roskam: i reclaim my time. mr. van hollen: i thought you said 30 seconds. mr. roskam: i thought within 30 seconds. and furthermore, they are doing it in an orderly basis, that is, amending the constitution forth rightly and directly. and i think in closing, mr. speaker, my hat is off to the gentleman from maryland, who no matter what the majority has come up with, always comes up with some argument that just defies logic, but most americans as they are listening to this debate are saying, cut it, cap

it and balance it and do it now. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i think what will defile the logic of the american people are why we are going to write into the constitution of the united states a provision that says a majority vote is needed to cut medicare, a majority vote is needed to cut social security, a majority vote is needed to cut education but you need 2/3 vote to cut oil subsidies, subsidies for corporate jets, that is something that defies logic. you would write into the constitution that says, even if you balance the budget at 19% of g.d.p. or some other level so we can meet the needs of social security and medicare, you wouldn't be able to do that. you would constitutionally prohibit that kind of balanced

budget, one that meets the needs of social security and medicare beneficiaries. that defies logic. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: mr. speaker, what defies logic is a $14 trillion debt and the democrats un willingness to do, put a balanced budget in the constitution so politicians have to do what they do in their homes. the other route didn't work. what part of $14 trillion don't you understand? what part of balancing the budget don't you understand? mr. van hollen: i understand $14 trillion. the speaker pro tempore: the time is controlled by the gentleman from ohio. the chair understanding that there are passionate arguments on both sides would ask all members to observe the decorum of the house and conduct debate accordingly. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: i yield to the distinguished majority whip, the

gentleman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from is recognized. >> interesting to listen to this debate and that's healthy and that's why we are on this floor. mrs. mccarthy: defying logic, -- mr. carter: defying logic, interesting term. so you understand to pay for the obligation that this government has already promised, so let's think about defying logic. the economy is tough and i sat in this house and watch the other side of the aisle put together a stimulus bill and their own people said they didn't know it would work. at the end of the day, defying logic is 270,000. defying logic, more people in america believe that elvis

presley is alive. defying logic, 28 straight months of unemployment above 8%. defying logic is to continue this pattern, but today we have a debate. today we have a choice. today we can take a new path. i understand why so vigorously you fight this because it would be a change to america. it would change the direction. and one thing i would ask is, when will the assault on the american people stop? that would be defining the pattern of where we are going to go. i want to ask you one thing. we ask in this bill to cut where you had government spending, discretionary spending gone up 84% in the last three years. to small business that would be quite odd they aren't able to do that. they are going to cap it so it won't grow out of control and

then going to ask for a balanced budget where 49 states have that , because what i want to say today is a new path, not a path of repeating the mistakes but a path to a new future. and when you think of a balanced budget and question the path, you know, 16 years ago, we came one vote shy in the senate. passed this body with fewer people on this side. that meant people on the other side of the aisle voted for it. some of the people in your leadership who have voted for it. i want you to think for one moment to the american public and i want them to imagine, imagine had we gotten that one vote, the debate today would not have taken place. the debate wouldn't be about $14 trillion. the debate wouldn't be that we had to change the path. the debate would be about the future of this country. what do you think we would be debating, what investments we would make to continue to make this country strong?

what ability we could grow with our businesses and it wouldn't be about unemployment. i want to hashingen back to a former president who said we can go to that shining city on the hill. my charge is for this body to join us on that climb. because this is the first step and when we get that, we will recharge that light and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. there are some things that we want to change and there are some things we don't want to change. one of the things we don't want to change is the constitution of the united states of america. and i think many of us think it is a corruption of the constitution to write in provisions that say you can only balance the budget the way the republicans want to balance the budget, you can only do it by capping things at 18%, even if

that means deep cuts to social security, deep cuts to medicare. we think it's a corruption of the constitution to write into the founding document a provision that says it's easier to cut social security and medicare than corporate tax breaks. that is in here. we keep hearing 49 of 50 states. 49 of 50 states do not write those kinds of provisions into their state constitutions. very few do. and for good reason, they are bad ideas, bad ideas now and will be bad ideas in the future, which would constrain the congress from balancing the budget in a way that reflects the will of the american people. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: 38 of those 50 states would have to agree to this before it could be amended. so the gentleman can say we are going to write this in. the states are going to decide this. that's the other part of the equation. i would yield two minutes to the gentleman from south carolina.

. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. gowdy: the president says he wants to do a big deal. he says he wants to do something transformative. he wants to do something that will echo in eternity and he's willing to risk his political career to get it done. history tells a very different story. in 2006, senator barack obama joined 47 senate democrats in voting no on raising the debt ceiling. this the first post partisan president casts a decidedly partisan vote in joining every single one of his colleagues in saying no to raising the debt ceiling. calamitous on the different definition in 2006 was reneging on your debts. was the apocalypse not in 2006?

in 2007, 2008 when again this goddy -- body voted on raising the debt ceiling. the president who is a senator from illinois was absent for both votes. fast forward to president obama. he's proposed a budget that raises this debt by trillions of dollars with no spending cuts. and then he famously invites our colleague, paul ryan, to the white house to lecture him on sensitivity and entitlement reform while offering absolutely no plan whatsoever on his own for entitlement reform. and then he said he wanted a clean debt ceiling increase, free from the nuisances of spending cuts and entitlement reform. and personal responsibility. how do you go from voting no on raising the debt ceiling to saying you want a clean increase

in the debt to now saying you want to do something transformative that exos -- echos in eternity? mr. speaker, the president says he has a plan. forget our skepticism. i'd like to see the plan. i prefer cut, cap, and balance, over punt, pass, and kick. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair would congratulate both floor managers as far as 38 3/4 minutes on the majority side and the minority side. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. mr. moran: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i -- all i have is a reference point what i observed over the last 20 years in this body. i remember when we were trying to pull out of the last recession in 1990.

and george h.w. bush called the leaders of both political parties together. they came up with a compromise. they raised revenue and they cut spending. and they started to pull us out of the deficit. and then the economy started rebounding. president clinton followed suit. and in fact he raised rates to 39.6%. we heard at the time all of these arguments to you can't do that. you can't do -- raise new revenue because it's going to cut jobs. and so on. the reality is, granted not one republican vote was cast to do that, but what happens? we know what happened? 20 million jobs were created. we had surpluses. we had the strongest economy in modern history. we reduced welfare. we grew the middle class. homeownership increased. and we handed over a surplus, projected surplus, $5.6 trillion. in fact, this year we would have

paid off the public debt. you know what happened to those who paid at the highest rate of 39.6%? they brought home more after tax income than at any prior time in american history. it worked. and now your party comes in with this attitude we have been hearing about all day. you drastically cut taxes, you ensure the debt, and in fact just this spring you voted for a republican budget that increased the deficit by $8.8 trillion. from $14.3 to $23.1 trillion over the next 10 years. but now you don't want to pay for it. that's what happened during the bush administration. we can't pay for anything. we didn't pay for wars. we didn't pay for expansion of medicare. that's why we are in the hole we are in. alan greenspan said, restore the clinton tax rate. every republican voted to let the bush tax cuts expire in 2011. do it. be responsible.

pay off our debt. let's get pass the first world status. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: members are again reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not to others in the second person. the gentleman from ohio. mr. jordan: i ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of controlling our time to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. ryan, who will also take over the final 30 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from wisconsin will now control 38 3/4 minutes. and the chair would recognize the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan. mr. ryan: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois. mrs. biggert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in support of this bill. it's no secret that the $14.3 trillion debt poses an extraordinary threat to our

financial future and extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. the cut, cap, and balance act would finally end the fiscal uncertainty and force the federal government to put the interest of the taxpayers first. our colleagues across the aisle claim that this goes too far by restricting future borrowing. but the reality is that this bill is simply cap spending at the same sustainable rate as past generations. about 20% of g.d.p., a post-world war ii average. for too long government has spent the taxpayers into a debt they cannot afford. cut cap and balance would -- cut, cap, and balance would show our competitors, creditors, and american people we are willing to make tough choices needed to restore confidence and growth in the united states. mr. speaker, it's time to cut the spending and give the american businesses the certainty and stability they need to create jobs. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i yield one minute to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. platte. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one min. mr. platts: i rise today in support of h.r. 2560. it is important for the president and congress to reach a final agreement on the debt ceiling that helps restore fiscal responsibility in washington, honors america's obligations, and puts our nation back on the path to prosperity. it is clear that our economy

will continue to struggle until washington demonstrates the ability to get our spending and our debt under control. and as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff has stated, our national debt is the biggest threat to our national security. the cut, cap, and balance bill before us addresses our nation's spending and debt challenges in a manner that stops delaying hard decisions. we immediately cut spender by over $100 billion. we cap spending in future years in less than 20% of g.d.p. and send a balanced budget amendment for states for ratification. at $14 trillion and counting, our national debt currently is quickly approaching 100% of g.d.p. the federal government is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends. america cannot continue on this unsustainable fiscal path. the full faith and credit of the united states government depends on congress acting. i urge a yes vote and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker.

i yield a minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. green. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. green: i rise in opposition to the drastic cuts of social security and medicare and other crucial federal programs that this cut, cap, and balance act were forced on the american people. the cut, cap, and balance act takes our nation closer to default, holding the debt ceiling hostage until congress passes the constitutional amendment to limit spending to 18% of g.d.p. the last time it was below 18% of g.d.p. was 1966. even under ronald reagan the federal spending averaged over 22% of g.d.p. there is almost no conceivable way to revert federal spending back to the 1960 levels without sharp cuts in every program, including medicare and social security. in order to reduce federal spending 18% of g.d.p., every federal program, including social security and medicare, would need to be cut 25%.

faced with the need to increase the debt ceiling in 1987, president reagan called on congress to raise the ceiling and said failure to do so would threaten those who rely on social security and veterans benefits, create instability in the financial markets, and cause the federal deficit to soar. i agree with president reagan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. rye yan: i'd like to yield -- mr. ryan: i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. hurt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hurt: today i rise in support of h.r. 2560. we are in a spending-driven debt crisis that continues to stall job creation, passes a crushing financial burden on to our children and affects all fifth district virginians. since president obama took office, our national debt has increased by $3.7 trillion. raising our current total debt to an unacceptable $14 trillion. now after 2 1/2 years of reckless spending, the president is asking we raise the debt ceiling once again. but we have yet to see any

concrete plan from this administration to help rein in the out-of-control government spending that has brought us to the brink of a debt crisis. so the house is once again leading and delivering on the message sent by the people of virginia's fifth district to change the culture in washington and end the government spending spree by putting forth a commonsense proposal that will cut, cap, and balance federal spending and force washington to live within its means. now is the time to put in place effective spending reforms to reduce our debt and deficits, return certainty to the marketplace, and preserve the american dream for our children and grandchildren. i thank the gentleman. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield one minute to the distinguished democratic leader, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: leader pelosi is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. speaker.

i thank the gentleman for yielding. i commend him for his tremendous leadership as our ranking democrat on the budget committee for bringing to that debate and that discussion at the table the values of the american people and the concerns that they have as they sit around their kitchen table. they are concerned that this saturday will mark the 200th day of the republicans attaining the majority in the house of representatives. and yet today another day goes by when we do not have a jobs bill on the floor. indeed, we should have a jobs bill. this isn't a jobs bill. we should be working together to lower the deficit, to grow the economy, to create jobs, and we should be doing so in a balanced bipartisan way. instead, we have before us what is called the republican plan to cut, cap, and end medicare.

this legislation is the republican budget that was voted on earlier this year all over again. wildly unpopular among the american people, the republican budget again ended medicare, made seniors pay more for less, while it gave tax breaks to big oil and corporations sending jobs overseas. made kids pay less for their education while it gave tax breaks to wealthiest people in our country. as our republican colleague has said, congressman jim jordan, chairman of the republican study committee, which is the source of this budget, he said on sunday, this legislation basically mirrors the budget proposal that the house passed this year. indeed it does. for it is -- it ends medicare, making seniors pay more while giving tax breaks to big oil and corporations sending jobs

overseas. furthermore, economists believe that the results of this legislation will be the result of -- the loss of 700,000 jobs. this legislation harms the middle class families, but don't take my word for it. nearly 250 national organizations oppose this legislation saying, quote, it would almost certainly necessitate massive cuts to vital programs like social security, medicare, medicaid, veterans benefits, and lead to even deeper cuts than the house passed budget. . mr. speaker, i heard the previous speaker say we have to think about future generations as we go forward in this debate and indeed, i agree. for that reason, i call the young people to my office over and over again, most recently last week, a large group of

college students, some just newly graduated, and i said, you know, your name is used at the table of the debt reduction, your name is used at the table that we owe this to future generations. i would like to know as a leader of the next generation, what do you think about what's going on at the debate table, the discussion table in the white house. what do you think of that, what values do you want me to bring from your generation to that table. with great wisdom, they talked about the fact that their education was central to their success and to america's competitiveness now and in the future. they talked about jobs. they said, please don't have the cuts in the legislation deter job growth and growth of the economy.

they said please don't harm medicare and medicaid, because that's very important to our families and sad for many of our families that enable us to go to college. we just wouldn't make it without that. they talked about -- they talked about actually one of the things they talked about, we want to share in reducing the deficit. we believe that everyone has a responsibility to do so. but we want our voices to be heard and we are concerned with voter suppression now around the country that barriers will be thrown up that will hurt our participation in the process. when i went to the white house, i spoke about that, but yesterday, i met with high school students, maybe well over 100 high school students. i asked them the same question

and they had similar answers and they said tell them if they care about the future generations, they should care about our education, they should care about the budget deficit, should care about jobs, they should also care about the environment, the environment, because of that, the condition of the environment is important to us. going back to those college students, that day, i went into the white house and told my colleagues, the president and vice president and republican and democratic colleagues what our college students said about education and i listened to the discussion and i thought, who is going to tell the children, who is going to tell the children that at this table, the suggestion is made that young people should spend $36 billion more, $36 billion more for interest on their student loans so we can reduce the deficit,

but not touch $37 billion, almost the same number, $37 billion in tax subsidies for big oil. who's going to tell the children that that is what the values are that are being proposed by the republicans at that table. $36 billion more charged to students, $37 billion as a gift to big oil, but don't touch that to reduce the deficit. it's stunning. it's stunning to me. as we use the name of the next generation and what we owe them and what we expect as they come out of school or what they need in order to afford school, in some cases that increase in the cost of interest payments will make it prohibitive, not more expensive, prohibitive for young people to go to school. one young man said to me yesterday, i just graduated from

high school, top of my class. i had great scores and everything. but i can't afford to go to college. i can only go to the community college in my town because i can only afford to be close to home and go to a community college. so please, in whatever it is you do, don't hurt community colleges. but isn't -- and community clgs are wonderful and they do a great job for our country, the training of our workers and the rest -- i had a privilege of speaking at a commencement ceremony at san francisco community college, so i value what they do. but this young man had no choice, had no choice because the cost of other education to him would be prohibitive and again, because of the economic situation, he had to stay close

to home. so let's listen to these people whose names we use, the next generation, the young people. we cannot heap mountains of debt on to them. we shouldn't and we didn't. when president clinton was president, he took the deficit he inherited into a path of fiscal soundness, into -- four of the five last budgets were in surplus. $5.6 trillion trajectory into surplus only to be reversed by president bush with his tax cuts to the rich, giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry and a swing of $11 trillion, biggest swing in fiscal situation in the history of our country. and that's the path we're on. i didn't hear anyone on the republican side say boo, boo

when the president was taking us so deeply into debt. and every time we stepped up to the plate and lifted the debt ceiling because that was the right thing to do. much has been said if we don't lift the debt ceiling what that means to our economy. we hear sounds from the tables and board rooms about what it will do to the stock market, the credit markets, what it will do to our reputation overseas and that's very important. but not only important is what is said around the board room table. what's important is what this means around the kitchen table for america's working families. american families could see an increase in mortgages, car loans, credit cards and student loans. social security and veterans' checks could be held up. stock prices could fall with a direct hit on families' 401k's,

pension and savings. it would be a job destroyer, job destroyer by heaping more economic uncertainty on america's families and the concerns they have that the education of their children, health of their families, security of their retirement around that kitchen table. rather than making progress on the debt limit to prevent these widespread consequences for america's middle class, this legislation takes us backward. throwing up further roadblocks to increasing the debt limit. we still have time to come together in a bipartisan and balanced way for a grand bargain that would ensure our nation meets its obligations while working toward a long-term plan to reduce the deficit, create jobs, grow the economy and strengthen the middle class. let us recognize that the best way to reduce the deficit is to get the american people back to

work. let us do as the president called upon us to do, outbuild, outeducate, outinnovate the rest of the world to win the future by creating jobs and together we can keep america number one. i see my distinguished friend from indiana is here and i heard his summation earlier, and i won't repeat it earlier but i'll give you my one-minute summation, this ends the medicare guarantee giving tax breaks to big oil and corporations, sending squobs overseas. i hope some of our republican colleagues will do before and vote against. a majority of republicans voted against this budget plan the day it came to the floor the day of the ryan budget. do the right thing so the next generation and vote no and yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: only place that our budget mention oil is that we want to drill more of it in our country and what we called for is limiting loopholes to have tax rates and guarantee social security and with that, mr. speaker, i would like to flee minutes to the gentleman from texas, house republican conference chairman, mr. hensarling. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, this nation suffers from a surplus of deficits. first, our seniors have a health care deficit, because in the last congress, democrats cut medicare by half a trillion dollars, hastening its bankruptcy and creating a new

board called the ipab in order to ration the access in quality of health care. next they brought us a jobs deficit, millions are unemployed and remain unemployed, the highest duration of long-term unemployment since the great depression. next, mr. speaker, we have the financial deficit. after the president's trillion dollar stimulus program which has failed, $1.4 trillion take over of health care, after increase of base government, 24% in two years, three -- $3 trillion-plus deficits in a row, we now have a debt crisis and the president says we need a balanced plan, i want you republicans to raise taxes to pay for my spending. well, mr. president, one of the

greatest impediments we have to job creation today is the threat of taxes to pay for your spending. every day i hear from small business people in my congressional district, washington seems to think they can tax its way out of our economic problem, which is not possible. we are not hiring or planning to grow for the next several years. we are concerned that our government will raise taxes or put other burdensome restrictions on us that we will not be profitable. the financial deficit is tied to our jobs' deficit. the american people have a message for their government. it is time to quit spending money we do not have. it is time to quit borrowing 4 cents on the dollar -- 42 cents on the dollar, much of it from

the chinese. today, house republicans bring to the floor the cut, cap and balance program. cut spending to at least the 2008 levels. who thought government was too small before president obama came into town. cap. since world war ii, spending has averaged 20% of our budget. every family has to budget. every small business has to balance their budget. 49 of the 50 states. but no our democrat colleagues say it is radical to balance the budget. what i say is, if we want jobs, hope and opportunity, we must cut, cap and balance. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i would remind my colleagues that the last time the federal government budget was in surplus

was during the clinton administration, at a time when they took a balanced approach to deficit reduction. unfortunately one that has been rejected by our colleagues in the communications and conversations with the president of the united states, who has put forward a proposal for $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue generated by closing special interest loopholes and returning to the rates that were in place for the very top income earners that were in place during the clinton administration the last time we were in surplus. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from virginia, member of the judiciary committee, a real leader on this debate. mr. scott: i would like to focus on the balanced budget amendments because the dirty secret is that it does not require a balanced budget. it will make it more difficult for future congresses to balance the budget so the title is just

misleading. let's go through some of the provisions. first provision, the balanced budget amendment requires 3/5's vote in the house and senate. every budget we consider this year and most of the budgets -- virtually every budget in the last 10 years was not balanced in the first year for all of those budgets, including the republican ryan plan and the republican study plan. would have required a 3/5's vote to pass. the deficit reduction requires tough votes, often career-ending votes. 199 clinton budget that was on the way to paying off the national debt if we hadn't changed it after 2001, we would have owed nothing to china, japan and saudi arabia, but that didn't get 3/5's of the vote and 50 democrats lost their seats as a result of that plan. the republican ryan plan repeals medicare is a good deficit

reduction plan and didn't get close to 3/5's and democrats have picked up one seat in the special election because the republican candidates supported it the republican ryan plan. it requires tough votes and increasing the votes needed to pass it will not help -- will not help pass a deficit reduction plan. . as of december we passed $800 billion in additional deficits with extending the tax cuts. those still could have been passed under this legislation because you only need a simple majority to cut taxes. and a budget which wean proposes additional tax cuts and even higher deficits would require the same 3/5's vote as the tough deficit reduction would require. tax cuts could pass by a simple majority. can pass by simple majority, but tax increases will require a 2/3

vote. common sense will tell you that that will make it harder to balance the budget. the 2/3 provision to spend more than 18% of g.d.p. will obviously put pressure on medicare and medicaid since we haven't put the -- we haven't been to 18% of g.d.p. since medicare was enacted. you can cut the benefits with a simple majority but to save the programs with additional taxes will require a 2/3 vote. finally, mr. speaker, we know that we should not be distracted by misleading titles. we should notice that the legislation will make it harder to actually balance the budget because it increases the number of members who might have to cast career-ending votes, makes it virtually impossible to raise revenues or close loopholes t. will compel deep cuts in social security and medicare, and you can't cure that with a simple nice little title. i urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i yield two minutes to

the gentlelady from wyoming, mrs. lummis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized for two minutes. mrs. lummis: thank you, mr. speaker. we don't have to pass this bill to read this bill. we know what's in it. it's been online for 72 hours. the american people can go read it. but in case you haven't read it, let me tell you what it does. it caps spending. it caps spending consistent with the discretionary spending cuts that we passed in the budget earlier this year. and it cuts the mandatory spending in 2012. setting us on the path that moody's and s&p say they need to assure investors that they can have confidence in u.s. treasuries. it will create the glide path that ben bernanke has told us over and over that we need to bring spending under 20% of g.d.p. and it will pass a balanced

budget amendment. like the vast majority of states have. this is the way to implement what we need to raise our debt ceiling. we know that we cannot default on our debt. so we will raise our debt ceiling in a way that standard & poor's and moody's have said they need to see. in order to assure our borrowers that our currency is valuable. that our obligations will be met. and that we are going to get our spending under control. as the chairman of the house budget committee said a few minutes ago, when we passed his budget, we passed a plan that would broaden the base of taxes and lower the rate that would not cut medicare for seniors,

for people over 55 years of age. who aren't yet on medicare. did not touch social security and yet would preserve for the american people the decisions that this country was founded on. mr. chairman, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. again i just remind my colleagues that only seven states placed both a supermajority requirements and the caps that this would place in the constitution of the united states. with that i yield one minute to the gentlelady from illinois who has been a leader and fighter in this debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. schakowsky: this republican bill cuts caps and balances all right. cuts medicare, caps medicaid, balances the budget on the backs of seniors. and republicans like to say that the public supports a balanced budget amendment, but when you

ask them if they support balancing the budget by making cuts to medicare and social security, by a two to one margin the american people say no. what liberal media outlet conducted that poll? fox news. there's something very, ver wit republican proposal that makes it far easier to cut medicare than to cut subsidies for oil and gas companies, easier to cut social security than ask for one penny more for millionaires and billionaires. of course we need to address our economic challenges, but not by holding our country hostage and threatening to not pay our bills with catastrophic consequence that is will hurt every american in order to push an extreme agenda that cuts social security, medicare, and medicaid. we have a jobs crisis. we have a disappearing middle class crisis. and this illogical bill which has no chance of becoming law will make things much worse.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from alabama, chairman of the financial services committee, mr. bachus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we just lerppeds -- heard we were cutting medicare, but it was the minority party that cut $500 billion out of medicare last year to pass obamacare. how quickly we forget. mr. speaker, one time people stored cash under their mattress for safe keeping. now people all over the world put that same money in treasury bills. that benefits every american and count -- in countless ways, let's not lose that advantage. the imminent threat to the safe haven of treasury bonds and our national security is default and downgrade.

however, by far the overriding danger is too much government spending. the federal government must do what every family in america is called on to do. at times when things are tight. that's cut spending and live within their means. as long as we ignore our spending problem, the economy will weaken, confidence will not be restored, jobs will not be created. we and more profoundly our children and grandchildren will bear the cost. earlier the minority leader said , what will the students say? what will the children say? let me say this. when we say to them, your money's all gone, we spent it, we lacked the courage to address the problems, we didn't confront the problems, what will our children say to us? what will our grandchildren say?

the heritage of america has never been can't do. it's always been can do. we can do it. we can rise to the challenge. we can answer our children and our grandchildren in future years and say, we did the right thing for you. we did the right thing for our country. we confronted the problems. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. what the democratic leader asked was, how could we tell the children that we chose to reduce the deficit by cutting their ability to afford college rather than cutting subsidies for the oil and gas industry? those are the kind of choices we are making. this is not a question about whether to reduce the deficit. this is a question about how we do it and what priorities we have. and we think it's absolutely the wrong priority to put in the

constitution of the united states a preference to cutting education, to cutting medicare, as compared to cutting subsidies for special interests, special interests takes for the purposes of re-- tax breaks for the purposes of reducing the deficit. i yield a minute and 15 seconds to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i thank the gentleman. i listened to the debate for a while now. the american people want us to compromise. the american people are in the middle. that's where most are. they don't want extremes from either side. so what would we do logically to find a solution in the middle? to close our budget deficit? we would first of all cut spending. secondly we would close tax loopholes for big corporations, and thirdly, we would let those who can afford to pay more, pay more. the president has proposed something like this, $4 trillion reduction in the deficit. and the republicans have refused to do it.

they refused to even plug loopholes for big oil and gas. so this is where we are now. it takes two to tango. if they are going to vote no on anything that closes tax loopholes, we have to just raise the debt ceiling. we voted seven times under brush to have a clean debt ceiling raised. 28 times under president reagan to have a clean debt ceiling raise. and yet the republicans won't do it. and they bring us to the brink of disaster. the truth of the matter is, we don't need extremes. as pointed out here before, this will end medicare and medicaid and social security as we know it because it will make it easier to cut those programs than it is to cut subsidies to big oil. that is shameful and this should be rejected. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i yield myself 30 seconds to simply say, i think the gentleman put social security there for a reason. the budget underneath these

don't address social security. more to the point, guess what, mr. speaker, ends medicare as we know it. the current law, the president's health care law, it raised half a trillion dollars and puts a board of 15 un-elected, unaccountable bureaucrats in charge of price controlling and therefore rationing medicare for current seniors. medicaid's going bankrupt. if you want these programs to succeed, you have to reform these programs. leaders see the problem and fix the problem. that's what we propose to do. with that, mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from mississippi, mr. nunnelee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi is recognized for two minutes. mr. nunnelee: i thank the gentleman for yielding. today the majority of americans don't believe the successive generations will enjoy the quality of life that they have enjoyed. and a lot of that fear is driven by unrestrained federal government, unrestrained

spending because the majority of americans understand the proverb, the borrower is the slave to the lender. just a few hours ago harper grace nunnelee entered the world. and today in her honor, her grandfather will cast a vote to secure the blessings of liberty for harper grace and for her brother thomas, and for their successive generations yet unborn. and i hope that a majority of my colleagues will join me as we vote to cut, to cap, and to balance. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i think we would all agree if we saw a wasteful spending program we should cut it for the purpose of reducing the deficit. and the question is, if there's a wasteful or unnecessary

special interest tax loophole, why shouldn't we cut it for the purpose of reducing the deficit? why should we write into the constitution of the united states a provision that says, you need 2/3 to cut a wasteful tax loophole. rather than say let's cut it to reduce the deficit for the benefit of our children. i would also observe, mr. speaker, that the republican plan with respect to medicare would force seniors out of the current medicare system into the private insurance market where the private insurance industry would ration their care. they would get a lot less support from 9 medicare -- the medicare program, and yet face much higher costs. that is a deal that members of congress don't give to themselves and i don't think we should ask seniors to take a deal that members of congress themselves do not take.

with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. garamendi: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr. speaker. americans want jobs. 200 days by the republican power in this house and not one jobs bill. this cut, slash, and burn legislation will not work. we need to invest, grow, and build strategy. . that's what americans want from congress. they want us to invest in education, invest in research and innovation, so america can remain a leader. they want us to invest in infrastructure, highways, clean energy, cut our dependence on foreign oil, because when we make it in america, that's when america will make it. americans can make it.

cut, yes. but what we ought to cut are the republican giveaways to the oil companies, wall street barons, hedge fund managers who enjoy massive tax breaks. that's where the tax breaks ought to be. they ought to be cut out. what of this legislation that's before us? we ought to vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i hope the gentleman joins us in supporting our plan then because our plan says get rid of all those tax loopholes. let's give tax rates for americans so we can grow our economy. here's the deal, mr. speaker. we tax our businesses at higher rates than our foreign competitors tax theirs, they win, we lose. some companies utilize loopholes and pay no taxes. others pay the second highest tax rate in the industrialized

world. i would say that the goal here is to get rid of all these loopholes so whoever your no matter what you make, pay the same amount of tax rates. we need to reform this tax code as we create jobs if we simply raise taxes, raise spending, borrow more money, we lose jobs. this debt is a threat to our current economy and the tax code is a current threat to our economy. with that, mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from new york. . hoke -- >> i rise in support of this act. this legislation is strong medicine, mr. speaker but it will cure what ails the american economy. for far too long, washington has overspent, borrowed and heaped debt upon our children and our

future children. if we don't -- if we don't make a change with cut, cap and balance now, the american dream will go away and we won't have the opportunities that this country has always offered. it's time for the federal government to get our spending under control. in this legislation, it's a good first step. it's a reasonable plan, far more than we have seen from the senate and the president. it is the only plan that will cut, cap and balance and do what we need to do for this economy. mr. speaker, washington has a spending problem. it does not have a taxing problem. i will just remind the speaker, in december, a democratic-controlled house, a democratic-controlled senate, and a democratic president

passed to extend the tax rate, the current tax rates because they knew what would happen if we raise taxes in an economy that is as sluggish and poor as this one is now. raising taxes is the wrong thing to do for this country and this economy. mr. speaker, most states have balanced budget amendments. it's time for the federal government to do the same. this massive spending-induced debt is crushing the american dream. we must stand up for the american dream and do what's right for america. i urge my colleagues to pass h.r. 2560. cut, cap, balance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: this is the only plan that would incertificate a provision into the constitution that makes it easier to cut medicare, easier to cut social security than it is to cut

subsidies to oil and gas companies or other special interests. we think that's a bad idea. that's why it's not part of the president's balanced plan to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 to 12 years. i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. holt: mr. speaker, this bill has a slogan for a title, unrealistic nonsense inside. under this, millions of students would not get pell grants and education and related programs would be cut by about 25% and further for the third time, third time that the majority is voting today to end medicare and double health care costs for seniors. we shouldn't be surprised that the majority is squeezing medicare. they didn't like it in the first place. they are reducing education grants. we shouldn't be surprised that they want to preserve subsidies to big oil and other fat cats

because it has been there for a century. we should be surprised or at least disappointed that they want to sacrifice america's credit rating and good name. we should be disappointed, too, that they won't allow congress to get on with the work, hard work, the important work of actually making jobs. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i yield one minute to the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. bishop: as previous speakers have said, we do not have a revenue problem. and we don't have just a spending problem. we have a doing problem. for the federal government has expanded beyond our core constitutional responsibilities and in so doing, we have created the financial crisis in which we find ourselves today. a balanced budget amendment would be a great addition to the constitution, in conjunction with and in respect for the 10

amendment, for what we refer to as federalism is the solution to our problems and the salvation to this country and the bill before us today is an excellent first step on our way to that ultimate salvation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, ms. davis. mr. davis: i want to bring the debate back to real people, to seniors who have been contacting my office sharing their fears, their concerns over inaction in this congress. a constituent said will she get her social security check after august 2. she doesn't know how she is going to pay her medicare premiums, mortgage, grocery bills or her prescriptions. our constituents do expect us to

work together to solve serious problems. yet we seem to be stringing the american public along here, playing games with their futures. this legislation was put together in the dark of night and brought straight to the house floor. my colleagues didn't hear from one witness on its consequences, didn't hold one hearing and completely bypassed the regular legislative process. instead of wasting valuable time on legislation that won't move beyond this chamber, we should focus on forging a bipartisan solution. let's agree on meaningful and rational solutions for the long-term before the debt crisis becomes worse. do one with job creation that won't/health research, medicare, medicaid, or education. mr. ryan: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. walberg: we're broke. and that's really not the legacy

i want to leave my grand kids. more unrestrained spending and tax increases will only slow our economy and make our fiscal problems worse. raising the debt ceiling without significant reform is not a solution but a gimmick. we have to get our spending under control and cut, cap and balance is the path to fiscal responsibility. this year alone the federal government will spend twice what it spent 10 years ago and 40% of it is borrowed money. we have accumulated debt in the past 2 1/2 years than we did through washington through president bush. it took 41 presidencies to spend what we have spent. we have to stop spending. it is causing the private sector to sit on the side lines, take fewer risks and create fewer jobs. and that's what it's all about,

isn't it? growing the economy, creating jobs. the cut, cap and balance act saves $111 billion in 2012 and $5.8 trillion. and includes capful spending back to below 20% of g.d.p. and cuts up the government's credit card bypassing a balanced budget amendment. my grand kids, washington, will have to do what every american family and businesses do every day, balance the budget. this saturday, i joined an afternoon in kicking the walnut down the street with my grand kids. but i don't want to kick the can down the road for them. i didn't have the guts to tell them that we have already taken their tax dollars from them before they are even at the point of going to school and ultimately going to work.

we need to stop our spending now. cut, cap and balance. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i yield one minute to the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. defazio: i support a honest balanced budget in 1995. there is no balanced budget amendment in this legislation. there is black mail that simply says that the republicans will drive the country to default unless congress later passes their right-wing version of a balanced budget amendment that requires an impossible 2/3 vote to close the egregious tax loopholes the same loopholes that the gentleman wants to close. there is no use trying said alice. won't can believe imaginary practice.

when i was your age i did it for half an hour a day, i believe as many as six imaginary things before breakfast or in this case, dinner and cocktails at the republican club. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: may i inquire as to the division of time? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin has 20 minutes and the gentleman from maryland has 21 3/4. mr. ryan: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert. mr. schweikert: my reason for coming to the floor today, there has been wonderful arguments hopefully on our side talking about being a relate particular path. the political rhetoric seems to lack bases in math. how many times today have we already heard the comments about those corporate jets? we need to get rid of those

depreciation. time for a little bit of math reality. we borrow $4.7 billion every day. if we eliminate those incentives for those corporate jet purchases, fine. it takes 15 seconds of borrowing a day. how can 15 seconds of borrowing a day be an honest discussion? how many times today have we heard about evil fossil fuels, those subsidies to big oil? let's do this, if we wipe out the subsidies to all fossil fuels, it would take care of 2.2 minutes of borrowing a day. how is that an honest debate? we are living in this fantasy world. let's go to the bush-obama tax extension, because, how many times do we hear around here, millionaires and billionaires, what would it be if you got right of the tax extension for all americans? it would get you 28 minutes of

borrowing a day. you don't raise unemployment. actually, we use the president's numbers and pretend you get every dollar and 28 minutes a day. think about that,. the rhetoric you have heard here for hours wouldn't even buy or actually only buy one half an hour of borrowing a day. i turn to my brothers and sisters on the left and say what would you like to do about the other 23 1/2 hours of borrowing a day? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: i would remind my colleagues to do the basic math, go back to the last time the budget of the united states was in surplus. it was during the clinton administration. it followed on some very difficult decisions in the early 1990's and what it included as part of the balanced approach was asking the folks at the very

top to pay a little higher rate than they are today. and what the president has proposed is to ask those americans as part of a shared responsibility to go back to paying those rates. and what our colleagues would plant in the constitution of the united states is a supermajority requirement, 2/3 vote to go back to the same tax rates that were in place during the clinton administration, but a majority vote if you want to reduce the deficit by cutting benefits for medicare beneficiaries, whose average income, by the way, median income, is under $22,000 a year. and with that, i yield one minute to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. langevin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. langevin: ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. . mr. langevin: i rise in

opposition to this bill. tiss a distraction to the ongoing negotiations necessary to avoid a catastrophic default on our nation's financial obligation. what we need in this challenging time is shared sacrifice. the democrats have called for significant cuts. closing tax loopholes and requiring people in the higher income brackets to pay their fair share while republicans continue to push to rely exclusively on draconian cuts on the backs of working seniors and families. one thing is clear, if we don't reach common ground now, america will default on its debt and that cannot happen. the most dangerous provision of this bill is the republican version of the so-called balanced budget amendment. while a balanced budget amendment done the right way is worthy of consideration, it must at a minimum be crafted responsibly. this bill does not do that. we all agree the budget should be balanced and needs to be and congress already has the necessary legislative tools to change its fiscal policies as we witnessed during the era of

surpluses under the clinton administration. the challenge lies in our collective abilities and individuals' intentions to work together toward a compromise that prioritizes programs both beneficial to our economy, and increases revenues to those who can afford it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: if we recall history i simply say that the quote-unquote corporate tax loophole is a provision that was in the president's stimulus bill drafted by democrats passed by democrats not supported by republicans. the quote-unquote oil tax subsidies were the result of a bipartisan legislation responding to a w.t.o. suit which said that all american producers, manufacturers, commess domestic producers get lower tax rates if they produce something in america. what the other side is saying is no, let's -- i yield another 15 seconds to say let's just raise that tax on just oil and gas not

any other manufacturer. and that is a subsidy for oil and gas. 15 more seconds to tell you, mr. speaker, this -- these provisions are so small they are just fundamentally inserious. they just an attempt to score political points to try and dodge coming up with solutions to solve a problem. we have a debt problem we have to deal with. we have a deficit problem we have to deal with. if we don't deal with it, we are going to lose more jobs. with that, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. paulson: it is true if we could as some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle suggest continue to practice business as usual with no plan to control spending. but what will that lead to? higher taxes, more spending, more debt, and fewer jobs. and with our country right now at a financial crossroads and unemployment at 9.2%, this is simply a future that we cannot

afford. by cutting spending now, by capping the growth of government, and by requiring a balanced budget we can finally get our fiscal house in order and get people back to work. american families have tightened their belts in these tough economic times. washington should do exactly the same thing. we need to pass the cut, cap, balance act so we can address our spending driven debt crisis, start paying down the national debt, and get our economy back on track. this is about protecting the future of our children and grandchildren. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i find it very curious that on the one hand our republican colleagues are saying that the revenues that the president's requested as part of a balanced plan are peanuts. that they are irrelevant and on the other hand arguing that somehow if you raise those revenues it's going to crush the economy.

they are trying to have it both ways. the fact of the matter is they are a balanced part of an overall approach that talks about reducing our deficit in a balanced way. and i go back to the fact that the last time we had that balanced approach was the last time that we had federal budget surpluses. and with that i yield one minute to the gentlelady, ms. clarke. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. clarke: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague, mr. van hollen, for the time. mr. speaker, the republican majority has spent over six months of the american people's time making it abundantly clear what their priorities are not. the republican majority does not have time to address jobs. as i stated we are here over six months into the 112th congress and we have yet to take one vote on a single comprehensive jobs bill. the republican majority does not

have time to address the economic realities facing millions of homeowners still facing foreclosure. in fact, we have voted on the republican bills that further undercut those who have lost their homes. the republican majority does not have time to work with the president and congressional democrats to deal with our national debt. they had rather protect tax cuts for multimillionaires and billionaires, and tax loopholes for corporate interests. what the republican majority does have time for is playing games, spending four hours debating a bill that, thank god, is dead on arrival in the senate. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: at this time, mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. kingston. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. kingston: thank you. i thank the gentleman for yielding. after a three-year spending spree in which the president drove up the national debt, 56%,

he has the nerve to tell the american people to eat their peas. after he's been on this supersize me diet, he turns around and tells struggling middle class families how to behave. one must ask where has the president been? he owns this economy. he's been in office nearly three years. it is his. it's his policies that have left 15 million americans out of work. it's his policies that have stifled growth and business investment. it's his policies that have created and continue these so-called tax breaks for big oil. it's his very signature that has extended the bush tax cuts. it's his policy that have given us the highest deficit spending in the history of the united states of america. he owns this. not president bush. not vice president cheney. not the republican party. not halliburton. not all of the other strawmen

that the president likes to set up to distract the american people. it was president obama who cut medicare $562 billion. it was president obama who set up ipad which is a health care rationing system which our moms and dads and grandparents will have to be suffering under. it was this president who took unemployment from 7% up to nearly 10%. and now we are having the debate of the decade and where is the president? we get from him not a plan but speeches. finger pointing. rhetoric, vague promises, but no plan. if there is a plan, could you lay it on the table? and i'll ask my democrat friends, do you have a plan? we keep hearing the president has a plan. could you put it on the table? i might want to vote for it. i might be interested in reading the bill. if there is a plan, could you please put it on the table?

just as i thought. there is no plan. the only plan we have right now is the republican plan -- this is the plan. mr. van hollen: the gentleman asked a question. will the gentleman yield? mr. kingston: this is the president's plan. speeches. that's all we are getting. no legislation whatsoever. i'll be glad to yield to my friend from maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. the gentleman well knows the president has put on the table a balanced approach, $4 trillion over 10 to 12 years. $3 in spending cuts to $1 in revenue. in fact the speaker of the house and the president of the united states, as my colleagues well know, were talking about a number of components of that plan and what was very clear is our colleagues didn't want to touch it because of this principle they have not $1 from

closing a tax loophole or revenue can go for the purpose of reducing the deficit. i will not. and we heard a little rewrite of history. let's just remember that when the president of the united states was sworn in he immediately faced a record $1.3 trillion deficit. the guy took office and it was $1.3 trillion that he inherited. 700,000 jobs were going down the tubes every month. it took a little while to turn things around. and things are still very, very fragile. what would be a huge mistake is to go back to the same trickle down on steroids policy that got us into this mess to begin with because we know how the movie ended at the end of the bush administration. they left this administration with a pile of debt, an economy that was falling through the floor. we need to work together to fix this problem.

but taking the position that you're going to prevent the united states from paying its bills, unless you implant in the constitution a provision that says it's easier to cut social security and medicare than cut corporate tax loopholes to reduce the deficit is not going to fly with the american people. and with that i yield three minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, the ranking member of the natural resources committee, mr. markey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for three minutes. mr. markey: i thank the gentleman. a poll completed by gallup just three days ago basically showed what democrats have been saying all along. americans want their congress to come together, to tackle our debt level with a responsible program of spending cuts and new revenues. here's what the poll said, 80%

of all voters want the democrats and republicans to come together on spending cuts and tax increases. 70%, 77% of independents, 74% of republicans. cbs has a very similar poll. what the republicans are saying is, we are not going to pay attention. the republicans are suffering from deficit attention disorder. they have spent their time in power paying attention to everything but the deficit. they have deficit attention disorder. they extended massive bush tax cuts for the rich. they voted to support billions in subsidies to the most profitable oil companies. ran up trillions in debt to finance two wars. allowed wall street to run wild with deregulation and smash our economy on to the rocks. but they only want to focus on the deficit when it means ending medicare. when it means shrinking social

security. they only want to focus on the deficit when they can still protect billionaires and protect big business. big oil. the republicans have political amnesia. they controlled the congress for 12 years. president bush controlled the presidency for eight years. they are the ones that ran up this huge deficit on their watch. and now what are they saying? they are saying pass a constitutional amendment because we win the presidency again so we stop us from killing the economy again. pass a constitutional amendment that doesn't let us do it again with a republican president, with 12 years of controlling the house and the senate. they want to leave america on the brink of becoming a deadbeat

debtor to the world. because they are irresponsibly ignoring what the american people are screaming at them. work together as parties. have deficit reduction and revenue increases. and tax increases on billionaires. but the republicans refuse to come together. they refuse to ensure that not just grandma having a shrinking of her medicare benefit, kids losing their pell grants, but also billionaires are at the table if this is such an armageddon level of financial crisis facing our country. but they are tied. they are tied back to the tea party. they are tied back to those that have tethered them to a policy that does not allow them to escape. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from

wisconsin for yielding. we did hear some rhetoric on the other side that basically said we do have a plan. that the president laid out a plan. it's clear. frakely the c.b.o. has taken a look at that, the compowcompow, to say we can't score speeches. this is a very serious time. we do need to talk about a big, bold plan to put ourselves and our country back on the right course. gentlemen, we just heard some rhetoric talking about how this was the deficit that the republicans had run up. let me tell you that, yes, the republicans have had some deficit spending. this is a bipartisan issue. washington has a spending problem. . we're spending $1. trillion this year of money we don't have. 36 cents of err single dollar we're spend is borrowed. mook, i'm a small business observer. i employ just under 100 people. for me that's 100 families. these are families that are living paycheck to paycheck. if i ran my business like the federal government is run today, i'd be out of business inside of

the month. it's frankly irresponsible the way this country is being run right now. we have to talk about tightening our belt, we cannot continue to spend the way that we've been spending and expect that we're going to get jobs. this is about jobs and the economy. we have to make sure we're providing more certainty because i can tell you i have rereceived phone calls from constituents and from business owners back in my district, 650 manufacturers in the 10th district in illinois, they do need to have certainty before they're going to invest back their business, before they're going to create additional jobs. we cannot be looking at trillions of dollars in deficit spending and expect that this is going to be a jobs plan. we have to tighten our belt. the american public has tightened their belt, american families are living under a balanced budget in their own right. american businesses are doing the same. they should expect that their federal government should also live within their means. there's no question that this is a very serious time.

we are not going to become a dead beat debtor. the way i tell my constituents back at home, mr. speaker, is that it's like purchasing a business. we think we have the best business in the world in the united states of america and, yes, got some debt of which we're obligated to pay, but we have to structure how that business is taking on that debt. if we're serious about wanting to reform it for next generations. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. >> thank you. it is not en-- it has not encun -- encouraged certainty or confidence in the markets or anywhere else for one party to say that if they don't get the budget their way they're going to prevent the united states from paying its bills. mr. van hollen: that sends a terrible message. american families don't have the luxury of saying that they're not going to pay their bills. with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. clarke. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan voiced

for one minute. -- is recognized for one minute. mr. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask this congress to cut and cap the true debt that's crushing americans right now, robbing them of any financial security and killing off jobs. i'm asking this congress to take certain mortgage loans, cut those mortgage principles and cap them the current home value. let's do that. that will help people who are underwater right now on their mortgages. let's cut, cap and forgive certain student loans so americans won't to have to spend a lifetime -- won't have to spend a lifetime repaying back on their education. you see, when you give americans more money by eliminating their personal debt, they'll be able to save more, invest more, responsibly spend more, that's how you create jobs. the most powerful way to get this economy engaged again is to help americans become free of

personal debt. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: mr. chairman, at this time i'd like to yield one minute to a member of the budget committee, mr. mulvaney from south carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mulvaney: mr. speaker, the fact that we are here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. leadership means that the buck stops here. instead washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren of america. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership and americans deserve better. i wish i could take credit for that one, mr. speaker, but i can't because that was president obama in 2006. i also wish i could take credit for, quote, i am willing to take down domestic spending to the lowest percentage of our overall economy since dwight eyes -- eisenhower. thaves our president last week. i wish i could tame credit for the claim that the president is offering a comprehensive program to force us to live within our means. this is a supposedly $4 trillion

reduction in spending, four thousand billion dollars that only cuts spending $2 billion next year. talk is cheap in this town, mr. speaker. it's time to match actions and words. it is time to act on the spending difficulty that we have and to pass cut, cap and balance. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. let me just quote from a letter. denigration of the full faith and credit of the united states would have substantial affects on the domestic financial markets, on the value of the dollar in exchange markets. the nation can ill afford to allow such a result. the risks, the costs, the disruptions and the incalculable damage lead me to but one conclusion, that we must pass legislation to raise the debt ceiling. president ronald reagan. now, there's legislation floating around here that creates this delusion into thinking that somehow we can get to that date and it's all made

up, it's secretary geithner cooked the books and there's legislation that says, you know what? let's pay the government of china and other creditors before we pay our troops, before we pay our social security beneficiaries. what moody's, what standard and poors, what others are telling us is that you can't decide to pay your mortgage but not your car payment. if the united states is not fulfilling its obligations to pay for what it's already bought , as ronald reagan said, that would have catastrophic consequences and that's why it's so dangerous to take the position that unless somehow in the next couple weeks we pass a constitutional amendment that would make it easier to cut medicare and social security than cut subsidies for the purpose of reducing the deficit, we don't do that we're not going to allow the united states to pay its bills and the committee -- the economy, as president reagan said, would go straight downhill.

with that i yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. connolly: thank you, mr. speaker. who are you kidding? cut, slash and burn. you bypassed your own rules to bring it to the floor. you say it protects medicare, it destroys medicare. you say you're protecting jobs, you'll cost hundreds of thousands of jobs if this ever saw the light of day in law. it disinvests in education, r&d and infrastructure in this country. that equals unilateral disarmament when it comes to the global competition and innovation and we might as well hand it over to our competition in brazil, china and india. shame on you, i urge the defeat of this phony bill. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not to others in the second person. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, the chairman of the government reform committee, mr. issa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. issa: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. issa: mr. speaker, for more than an hour i've listened to floor debate and it seems like one side wants to say that we have to cut and the other side says that any cut we do is wrong. one side says we have to do tax increases, the other side says no. what the american people need to hear, mr. speaker, is we now spend almost 1/4 of every dollar produced in our economy and as my now deceased father-in-law would have said, taxes are rocks in your knapsack. the american people cannot afford to have more and more weight on the economy. this is not an argument about how much we spend, this is an argument about what the american people can afford in overhead that ultimately hurts our competitiveness in jobs, big and small, foreign and domestic. so i'll be voting for this and every other initiative that can possibly give the american people a fighting chance to compete for good paying jobs

here and in competition with the rest of the world. i urge the support and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. again, the president's proposal which mirrors the framework of the bipartisan simpson-bowles commission says we'll do $3 in cuts with $1 in revenue. it's shared responsibility to reducing our deficit so that our economy in the future can grow. let's make sure that we don't do anything now that will hurt the fragile economy. i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. peters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. peters: i rise today in opposition to h.r. 2560. since take office i have fought for greater fiscal responsibility in washington, i have voted against hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending and today there is a new bipartisan consensus that a comprehensive deficit reduction plan is a national priority. but unfortunately republicans

are squandering this opportunity. rather than a balanced approach they are pursuing a radical agenda that will force our nation's seniors and middle class to sacrifice while letting millionaires and special interests keep their tax breaks and loopholes. let us be clear. a vote for this bill is a vote for drastic cuts to medicare and for putting teachers, firefighters and police all over our country out of work. republicans need to stop playing games with our economy and start working for what american people want, comprehensive deficit reduction that shares the burden, strengthens medicare and social security, ends tax giveaways for the well connected and puts our country on a path to financial security. this bill fails to address these needs and should be defeated. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, if we're talking balance, let's remember the fact that a big tax increase is already coming in current law. let's remind ourselves of the fact that in 2013 you have $800

billion in taxes with the health care law, the president's promising another $700 billion in tax increases. we got a $1.5 trillion tax increase coming, hitting small businesses square in the bottom line, putting a chilling effect on jobs and in the interest of balance they want to put more tax increases on top of that. with that, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. canseco. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. canseco: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, once again in the debate over our nation's fiscal future the house of representatives is leading. i commend my colleagues for bringing forward a solution to cut, cap and balance the federal budget. together these will help ensure that it is the federal budget that will be restrained and not the family budget. regrettably i cannot vote for this bill. i do so not because i have any issue with cut, cap and balance.

i strongly support that part of the bill. what i cannot support is that this bill fulfills president obama's request to raise the amount of debt that will be borne by american taxpayers by over $2 trillion. every american household's share of our national debt is already at $120,000 and president obama has asked this house to add an additional $20,000 per household as a burden. it is regrettable that president obama has asked congress to raise the nation's debt ceiling and allow more debt to be thrust upon american taxpayers in order to pay for the spending binge he embarked upon over the past two years. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin has 8 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from maryland has 8 1/4 minutes. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. israel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes.

mr. israel: i thank my friend from maryland. mr. speaker, well, they're right about something. this is cut, cap and balance except that it cuts at the middle class, it caps medicare and it balances budgets on the backs of seniors. and that is the fundamental difference between them and us. look, we agree that our debt is unsustainable and that we've got to tighten our belts. we've got to reduce spending. and we believe that we need to balance our budget through a balanced combination of spending cuts and revenue increases. and we've got to grow our economy. but here's what this budget says. it says to a constituent of mine living in new york that if you're a middle class family and you want to send your child to college, to a community college, you pay more for your pell grant, you pay more for tuition. if you are a worker in huntington who just lost a job because the corporation you were working for outsourced your job to china, you have to -- you watch your unemployment

insurance capped or cut. but if you're a millionaire making over $1 million a year, you get a $100,000 tax cut. that's not cut, cap and balance, it is an assault on the middle class and it is an assault on fairness. mr. speaker, the middle class has always been the backbone of our economy and this legislation is a kick in the stomach ock to the middle class. mr. speaker, they tell us that they want to cut spending, they will not cut spending when it comes to tax loopholes, they will increase it. they will not cut spending when it comes to those $4 billion in oil company subsidies, they will increase it. they will not cut spending when it comes to special interest tax preferences, they will increase it. but when it comes to the middle class, they want them to pay more. mr. speaker, the real cut, cap and balance should be this, we ought to cut those tax loopholes, we ought to cap those

tax subsidies and we ought to balance this budget through the right and smart kinds of spending reductions and revenue increases that are fair. i thank the gentleman for his time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from utah, a member of the budget committee, mr. chaffetz. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for one minute. mr. chaffetz: routinely the other side of the aisle, mr. speaker, has made the allegation that the president has offered a balanced plan. i would argue that he has offered neither. the president has never, never introduced a balanced plan. he's never had anything that's in balance. in fact, the budget he submitted never balances. in fact, it doubles and then triples the debt. it went before the united states senate, 97-0 that budget was rejected. rejected by the united states senate. . the second part of this he has not introduced a plan to deal with this crisis that we are in. there is no piece of paper. there is no -- lots of speeches.

lots of things doing press conferences. we need a solution. what cut, cap, and balance does is it not only solves the short-term problem, it starts to put it on the right pathway but sends to the states. and ladies and gentlemen, what should we be afraid of? all we are asking to do is put forward a balanced budget amendment and send it to the states. with a very high threshold, where three out of four states would have to ratify in order for it to become an amendment to the constitution. we keep spending money we don't have. every time we look at a decision we have to understand we are asking to pull money out of somebody's pocket and give it to somebody else. those days are gone. i came to washington, d.c., to change the way we do business. cut, cap, and balance will do that. we need a balanced budget amendment. the choice is clear. are you in favor of a balanced budget or not? that's what's before us today and that's the direction this country needs to go to get its fiscal house in order. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. speaker. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: we reserve the right to close. have no more speakers. mr. van hollen: i do have one more. mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. without objection. mr. andrews: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to take time out for just a minute and go back to the question i'm hearing most people in america ask about which is jobs. and one of the things we keep hearing from the other side is that asking ethanol producers to give up their subsidy or asking corporations to give up their special loopholes is a job destroying idea. please, before you cast this vote, all members look at these facts. in 2001 and again in 2002, we

did what the majority says endlessly what they want to do. cut taxes on the wealthiest americans. the economy produced zero net private sector jobs between 2001 and 2008. in 1993, president clinton did the opposite of what the majority says it wants to do. he made a modest increase in the tax rate of the wealthiest americans. the economy produced 23 million new private sector jobs. the house deserves the facts in going forward in this debate and the american people deserve a real jobs plan from this house. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. and i'll end where we started today which is to say that our republican colleagues are playing a very dangerous game with the economy and with jobs. what this legislation before us

says is that unless we graft on to the constitution a preference for their way of addressing the budget deficit, unless we do that, they will prevent the united states from paying its bills with all the terrible economic consequences for american families. so let's see what it is that they are demanding in exchange for letting the economy go. it's the same old plan that we saw in the house before. it does end the medicare guarantee. it slashes medicaid. it cuts education. and it protects special interest tax loopholes, but what makes this particularly egregious? what should i think upset every american is they are trying to engineer those changes through the constitution. we keep hearing this is just a plain old balanced budget

amendment. 49 out of 50 states have it. not true. this would put into the constitution of the united states, embed in our constitution, a provision that makes it easier to cut medicare, social security, education. 50% vote. but if you want to cut a special interest tax loophole, i don't care whether it's oil and gas subsidy, corporate jet, you name it, that a lot of washington lobbyists work overtime to get inserted in our tax code which amounts to spending through the tax code, if you want to do that you need a 2/3 vote. they put another mechanism into the constitution. they would make it unconstitutional to balance the budget if we are having expenditures at the rate of 19% or 20% of g.d.p. acourting to the provision that came out of their amendment. in other words, the american people cannot choose a level of expenditures that would allow us to meet our obligations under medicare and social security. since 1966 our federal

expenditures have been above 18% of g.d.p. in other words, since we enacted medicare. so they want to prevent us by constitutional fiat from balancing the budget at a higher level of expenditures that would allow us -- let me make one last point on medicare because we heard about the democrats cut $500 billion. what we did was we eliminated the subsidy, 114% subsidy going to medicare advantage plans. we did do that. and you know what? republicans say what a terrible thing, but if you look at their bunt, they assume that change. -- budget. they assume that change. they keep that change. what they do is what we did which is use the savings to close the prescription drug doughnut hole. the republican budget would needly reopen that doughnut hole. so they took the savings that they are complaining about, they didn't use any of it to close the doughnut hole.

again the fundamental question is this. we all understand that we've got to reduce the deficit. we've got to bring the budget into balance. the question is, how we choose to do that. and why would we implant in the constitution a mechanism that stacks the deck in favor of choosing to cut medicare and social security and education over choosing to cut corporate tax loopholes or asking the folks at the very top to pay more? but they would do that to our constitution. look, the founders made it difficult to change the constitution for good reason. and this i believe is a corruption of the constitutional process because it would place these mechanisms into our founding document that essentially graft the republican budget plan into that document.

and that's what this vote is all about. and what they are saying is that unless 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate adopt that kind of constitutional amendment, we are not going to pay our bills. bills which the speaker of the house and the majority leader and people on both sides of the aisle should pay because they are the consequence of decisions that were made by this body. and right or wrong, when you ring up the bill, you can't say you're not paying for it. and if we take the position that we are not going to pay for it, the economy will suffer. interest rates will go up. that will hurt every american family and it will make it harder for us to reduce the deficit. so let's come together around a balanced plan. the president's put a proposal on the table. $4 trillion over 10 to 12 years. patterned after the bipartisan

simpson-bowles commission, $3 in cuts. $1 in revenue. let's take a balanced approach. that's the way we did it the last time our budget was in surplus. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: all time for the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, i yield myself the remainder of the time and i ask unanimous consent to address the house in the well. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman has seven minutes remaining. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, here's our problem. we have a crushing burden of debt that is coming to hit our economy. this is where it all comes down to. we are driving our country and our economy off of a cliff. the reason is, is because we are spending so much more money than we have.

we can't keep spending money we don't have. 42 cents out of every dollar coming out of washington is borrowed money. let's take a look at where it's coming from. we are borrowing it, 47% of it from other countries. china number one. mr. speaker, you can't have sovereignty, self-determination as a country if we are relying on other governments to cash flow half of our deficit. this is where we are. here's the problem we have right now, mr. speaker. we have a leadership deficit. i keep hearing about the president's got a plan. the president's offering balance. the president hasn't offered a thing yet. nothing on paper. nothing in public. leading on reporters at press

conferences is not leadership. giving speeches according to the bow is not -- c.b.o. is not budgeting. the president did inherit a tough problem. no two ways about it. what did he do with this problem? he drove us deeper into debt. $1 trillion of borrowed money for a stimulus that was promised to keep unemployment below 8% and went up to 10% and now it's alt 9.2%. a stalled economy. a budget the president gave us that doubled the debt in five years and triples it in 10 years. that's not leadership. what has the other body done in the senate? our partners on the other side of the aisle. mr. speaker, it's been 811 days since they bothered trying to pass a budget.

congress has gone for two years without a budget. what did we do? when we assumed the majority? we passed a budget. we wrote a budget. we did it in daylight not in the backroom. we drafted it. we brought it through the committee. we had amendments. we brought it to the floor. we debated it and we passed it. that is what we have done. and when you take a look at our problem, mr. speaker, you have a dress what is driving our debt. here is just the cold hard facts. 10,000 people are retiring every day. the baby boomers are here and we are not ready for them. far fewer people are following them in to the work force. health care costs are going up four times the rate of inflation. the congressional budget office is telling us medicare goes

bankrupt in nine years. medicaid is already bankrupting our states. these are the drivers of our debt. by the year 2025, three programs, social security, medicaid, and medicare plus our interest consume 100% of all federal revenues. by the end of this decade, 20% of our revenues go to just paying interest. this is unsustainable. so what does our budget do? what does the document that we passed that shows leadership on this issue do? it saves these programs. for medicare, we say you owe the retired if you are retired. if you are about to retire we don't pull the rug out from under you. you organize your life around these programs so let's keep it as is. but in order to cash flow that commitment, in order to make good on that promissory note, you have to reform it for the next generation. and let's do it in a way that --

that looks like the commission that president clinton offered. a system that resembles the one we have as members of congress. where you get to choose the plans that meet our needs. we don't subsidize wealthy people as much. and we subsidize low-income and sick people a whole lot more. that's what a safety net is. we fix it and we save medicare. what does the other body do? what does the law do that the president does? raise half a trillion dollars from medicare, puts a new board in charge of price controlling and rationing care to current seniors, and does nothing to save it from bankruptcy. these are the issues that got to be dealt with. mr. speaker, we keep hearing about balance. we keep hearing about the need to raise taxes as we cut spending $3 for one or something to that effect. the red line shows congressional budget office projections on

spending. the green lines are taxes. basically what this says is there is no way you can tax your way out of this problem. we asked the congressional budget office if we tried to do that, have balance, raise taxes, the tax rates of the next generation would be this. the lowest income tax bracket, lower income people play which is 10% now goes to 25%. middle income taxpayers pay a 66% rate. and the top tax rate which would all those successful small businesses that create jobs pay would go to 88%. that's according to the congressional budget office. that's the path we are on right now. . this is unsustainable. what is needed is leadership and the reason we're talking about this debt limit increase is because we've seen none, none from the president, none from the other body. and so if we're not going to have a budget process, how on earth are we going to get

spending under control so we can solve this problem? our budget this cap and this cut -- our budget, this cap and this cut, gets the debt paid off. it put us on a path to prosperity. it closes loopholes to lower tax rates to grow jobs. it says that the genius of america is the individual, is the business, not our government. it maintains the american legacy of leaving the next generation better off which we know, without a shadow of a doubt, we are leaving the next generation worse off. you know, in the good old days of 2007 we used to say that this debt was a threat to our children and our grandchildren. not so anymore. it is a threat to our economy today. pass cut, cap and balance, save this country, grow the economy and save the nation for our children and our grandchildren. with that i yield.

the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 355 the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to cut, cap and balance the federal budget. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the chair: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? >> i am in its current form. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: motion to recommit offered by mr. bishop of georgia. at the end of section 301 add the following new subconnection -- subsection, c, protecting our veterans, it shall not be in order in the house of representatives or the senate to consider any balanced budget amendment to the constitution that could result in a reduction in veterans benefits. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes in support of his motion. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, and my colleagues, there are many times when we come to this floor and engage in heated debate and we have heard some heated debate today. this so-called cut, cap and balance bill does just that. it cuts and it caps programs that will work for everyone and put america ahead of our competitors. it cuts and caps our ability to jumpstart new industries in our country like clean energy. it cuts and caps our ability to remr. our economic infrastructure like roads -- to rebuild our economic infrastructure like roads. it cuts job training opportunity to help middle class people get and keep good jobs. yes, it cuts and it caps but it balances the cuts and the caps

by protecting tax breaks for the wealthiest folks in our country. by providing subsidies for corporations that take jobs overseas, away from american workers. by cutting medicare and social security benefits for our nation's seniors, balancing on the backs of them. so i have some problems with this bill, mr. speaker. but i'm a realist and i realize reluctantly that it might just pass. so regardless of how we may feel about the underlying legislation , this motion to recommit is something upon which we ought to all be able to agree, it simply says that it shall not be in order in the house of representatives or the senate to consider any balanced budget amendment to the constitution that could result in a reduction in veterans benefits.

mr. speaker, we have already seen what a shortfall in veterans funding can do. i remember the problems with veterans care, i remember the $1 billion shortfall a few years ago when the department of veterans affairs had to raid its operations and maintenance account to help pay for veterans' basic medical care. even now veterans have to wait years to have their claims adjudications -- adjudicated because there are just not enough adjudicators. they have to wait to go to get doctors, to get their treatment. with more of our service members return home every day, more vets returning home who have no opportunity or limited opportunity for job training, returning home with ptsd or returning home now having to face the possibility of limited educational benefits because of

this bill and its progeny. mr. speaker, now is not the time tone danger benefits to our -- to endanger benefits to our nation's veterans. when veterans come home without limbs because they have defended our freedoms we should not put in place cut, cap and balance legislation on their backs, the backs that are strained and damaged by the injuries they sustained fighting for this country. we should not stand idly by and watch this congress endanger the welfare of our nation's heroes. today's nation's military remains deployed overseas as it has during the last nine years. the funding requirements we face in meeting the needs have significantly increased as we continue to meet an address the longstanding issues from past and current wars. and we cannot watch the requirements of these fighting

men and women who come home continue to die. these needs last long after the last american combat ants depart iraq and afghanistan. this motion to recommit would simply protect our veterans from any potential unintended consequence resulting from this ill-conceived bill, the so-called cut, cap and balance act. the needs of america's veterans should be one of our highest priorities and this motion will ensure that our veterans are taken care of and that they receive the benefits they have earned. let's be clear, the passage of this motion to recommit will not prevent the passage of the underlying bill. this amendment is adopted, it will be incorporated into the bill and the bill will be immediately voted upon. so though we may disagree on the bill, today we have the opportunity with this motion to recommit and my amendment to speak with one voice in support of our veterans.

it is up to all of us, i urge you to vote yes on this motion to recommit. but let's make sure that if this bill as its -- passes, the cut, cap and balance and any balanced budget will not result in a reduction of veterans benefits. vote yes on the motion to recommit and protect our nation's veterans. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? mr. ryan: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, i have fantastic news. all of the gentleman from georgia's concerns have already been addressed in this legislation. let me simply refer you to section 317 where it says exempt from direct spending limits, section b-3, veterans benefits and services, which is all the of function 700. let me refer to you section 318 that shows when it comes to sequestering, which is an enforcement mechanism on

spending caps, exemption, veterans benefits. veterans benefits are explicitly preserved in this legislation, just as they are with the budget that we had passed. that this cap and cut conformed to. so make no mistake, mr. speaker, there are no cuts to veterans in here because we agree, the men and women out there fighting on the front lines for our freedom have been given promises to benefits like health care and others and those promises of all are to be kept. and so that is why we've already taken care of the gentleman's concerns so the recommit is unnecessary because we preserve these benefits explicitly. i will not yield and with that, because there's not much more to talk about, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

without objection, the previous request is ordered on the motion -- question is ordered on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noesster and the -- mr. bishop: i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has asked for the yeas and nays. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 0, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a five-minute vote on passage of the bill if ordered and approval of the journal. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]