year we kept at it inadequately got more and more votes. i became the republican leader on the budget. we went through a government shutdown because the administration wants to cook the books. after a while they understood our determination in we had a lot of meetings working with my colleagues on the budget committee, the leadership. we actually were able to pass the first outline for a real balanced budget and we not only looked and reviewed all the spending but we cut taxes at the same time. we cut the capital gains tax. what happened resulted in the first balanced budget since man walked on the moon.

i was able to declare victory for all the work that i put in. at that point we had a $5 trillion budget surplus. at the same time, i had become a military reformer. i was a part of one of the early reform efforts of spare parts. i was involved with procurement reform all of my career. i was even involved in the way in which the pentagon operated. you might remember that services weren't very independent with each other. in the war in lebanon our marines could be on the beach and see a navy ship in the ocean, but they could communicate with each other. -- they could not communicate with each other. so we went to work. many of them were democrats as well. we put together what was called the goldwater-nichols bill which

created special forces command and got the forces to work together. because if you don't work together in the time of war, you have the problems you have with lebanon. it was the most are matted change in the military operated in modern history. i was a member of the political on couple working with a liberal democrat from california to limit the production of the b-2 bomber. they wanted to buy 132 and its mission was to fly in the middle of the soviet union during a nuclear war to drop more bonds. i said we should limit its production and take the savings from that and put it into advanced weapons so that pilots don't have to fly over targets and we can use these weapons at a distance to accomplish our goal a much less expensive way.

at the end of the day, we went from 132 b-2 bombers down to 20. i think it is important that when we build systems to meet the threat, we don't build systems just to be in a position to have some sort of job creation program. i think that the feds ought to be what it is all about, having systems to meet a threat in the country. with accomplishing that, i decided to leave. i went to work for lehman brothers. i worked really in a two-man office in ohio and traveled the country. one of the things i was able to do was workforce of cool -- was work with sequoia capital out in california. when i first started doing out there, people were so successful and what got me so thrilled was that they created the future. i am a person who loves the future.

i don't like to live in the past and only momentarily in the present. to be out there, and i was in the offices of sequoia capital and this guy comes running in the building with a ponytail and torn of genes, -- torn up jeans. and the guy was with said you should have met him. he has this company you have never heard of. i asked what the name of the business and he said it was this little thing called you to -- called youtube. being out there and understanding venture capital ideas, how to bring things to the fore, was thrilling for me. and of course i was a giant television star at fox news. and i served on boards of companies and made speeches all over the country and wrote a

book and i was having a great time in the private sector. as chris shays was saying, i love the fact that i'm not a government anymore. before the young people here, the lord has created us, each of us special for a special purpose. we are made unique and we have a job to do on this earth. for those that hear that and answer the call, in my opinion that is how you find meaning in life. i have this nagging feeling that the lord had been good to me throughout my life. my father carried mail on his back. my mother's mother could barely speak english. and yet i had a terrific career. i floated in 2006 about running for governor, but i haven't been out long enough.

i wanted to breathe the fresh air. then in 2010, the call was pretty clear, so i decided to run for governor. my wife wasn't all that thrilled , but she said i given so much of my life do public service why don't you just do more for charity? i said i really need to do this. so iran and i want. --i ran and i won. when i won, i had no time for politics. and when i won, my job was to do political calculations and build a political career. my job was to step up to the plate, gathering group of people, and solve problems. if i won again after serving four years, great. if i don't win, great. let me go do my job and fix my precious state.

we were dying in ohio. people talk about a flyover state, people didn't even look down when they flew over ohio. we were $8 billion in the hole when i came in. we worked with members of the ohio house to try to address this problem. $8 billion in the whole of our budget. he calculated about 18% were in the whole. people said you need to raise taxes. i said that if you have a restaurant and don't have any customers, you can't raise prices. you have to cut prices and change the menu. we started digging into the entire budget. we kind of put the band back together. there were people who had worked for me for well over 20 years who said they wanted to be part of this. so we reengineered the state of ohio. and i saw some folks this morning from the aarp. we provided some of the most

robust home health care in the country and said that if you are able to stay in your own home, you shouldn't be forced into a nursing home. if you need one, great. if you don't need one, stay in your own home where will be less expensive. that a billion-dollar hole started to disappear. we also lost 350,000 jobs. i think about our ohio stadium that basically holds 100,000 plus. that means that stadium was built three times and people walked out of that stadium and they went home and told their kids and spouse at dinner, i lost my job today. where i come from, when the wind blew the runway, people lost their jobs. i understand the pain of unemployment. it is personal. it creates uncertainty in the mind of the person who loses

their job. it creates fear in the lives of children in the family. 350,000 jobs in our debt was hanging in balance. i went to new york and i said we can fix all this. where are we today? we are no longer $8 billion in the hole. frankly folks, you need to know. almost half of the states in this country or in structural imbalance. some of the and run by republican governors. they can't figure out how to balance their budget. we are completely and totally structurally sound in ohio and we went from $8 billion in the hole to wear at the end of this budget cycle we will have a $2 billion surplus in a. of -- surplus in a period of about four years. and we were down those 350,000 jobs. now we are up about 340,000 jobs

to the good. think about that turnaround in a period of just a little more than four years. and taxes -- we have cut taxes by a more than anybody in the entire country. we are going to have at least another $500 million tax cut in this budget. $3.5 billion in tax cuts, including killing the death tax in the state of ohio. we are very proud of all this. and what it shows is that tackling problems can lead to economic growth. when you go to balance budgets don't think about slashing and burning. think about google, think about yahoo!, think about paypal,

think about amazon. the key in the 21st century is have you reengineered things to give you more value at a lower price that brings more customer satisfaction. what that requires is, you don't pay attention to the special interest groups. they all have their particular point of view. think differently, think big think creatively. that can make such a big difference. what we found in ohio as removed to eliminate the deficit and build surpluses, people are pretty happy with what is going on. a pretty amazing situation. so folks, as we created this economic growth, some conservatives and some republicans believe that economic growth is in and to itself. -- is ane end in and of

itself. i believe it is a means to an end. we have left some people behind -- the mentally ill, the drug addicted, the working poor, people who have been imprisoned. we put a lot of emphasis on raising the prosperity and opportunities for minorities in the state. we brought some of our money back from washington. we've been able to put more resources into our local community. we have 50,000 people in our prisons. we have one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country because we give people a chance to rehabilitate themselves in given a chance to get their lives back together. 20% of the people that sit in our prisons have some form of mental illness.

so you are bipolar and what we are going to do is lock you up in a prison and then we release you? to where? so we can put you back in the present? it is immoral. we made a promise to the mentally ill in our communities. once we deal institutional eyes them that we would take care of them. but they are so easy to run over. not in ohio. the national association of mental illness is holding ohio up as a model state. with the proper medication proper guidance, rubber oversight, people -- proper oversight, people can get their lives back. drug addicted? 80% of our prison population has one form of addiction or another. we are about helping people in

the prisons get over their addictions and to take them from the prison setting and move them into the community with the same kind of rehabilitation. what we estimate is that we will have a 10% recidivism rate for those we are able to treat. for the working poor, you work hard and he tried to get a little raise and they take her child care away from you. we have a bigger problem -- we tell about marginal rates for the rich, think about marginal rates for the poor. how do you work yourself out of a situation where you are a single mom with kids in the minute you get a raise you lose your childcare? we are working be a child cap to 300% of poverty so that you can become independent. we talk about the family. you realize that under federal

law that a dad living in the home loses their benefits. what we are to be doing is trying to keep families together. we should be having federal laws or state laws that break down the family. we know the stronger the family is the better off the future of our children it's. -- future of our children is. i want entrepreneurship in our minority cuties. i want to -- minority communities. that is what is really all about. ladies and gentlemen, we do treat these folks who have the mental illness and the drug addiction and the working poor. there are debates in all the states. but we move quickly beyond that

and now we are involved in welfare reform. i was involved in welfare reform in congress. now i'm involved with welfare reform 2.0. one of the things that we have to do is to make sure that when somebody is down, we not only give them the temporary help to get them up, but that we need to give them the tools that they need to become fully successful in life. we are now proposing, and this will be accomplished through the legislature, a welfare reform plan. it says that if you are on welfare and you go and are on food stamps or medicaid or any of these things, you can go into a welfare office and have four or five caseworkers. what we are telling the local welfare people are, you get one caseworker and coordinate all activities. and not only you find out the needs of the person that comes

in, but you find out why they have needs. and what you know what their needs are, you must address those needs. we can train these folks for jobs that exist and get them on their feet and and the cycle of poverty. in what i have told the welfare offices, if you do not do this, i will take your money away and give it to somebody who will do it. there is no excuse for not getting people are chance to get up on their feet and be successful, independent people again. i want to just give you a couple lessons and then take a couple questions. first of all, this is why love judd and chris, because i work with them. leaders don't take polls. i tried to tell my colleagues

and legislature -- my colleagues in the legislature. you do your job. if you are worried about election or reelection, you are doing your job. if you do your job, you are likely to win. to do your job and lose an election, that's not good. but think about if you don't do your job and play politics in lose your election. we don't have time for regret in political life. if you put your hands on the wheel, drive the car. in my first year, in the middle of doing all these budget efforts and a whole idea of things including reform of public employees, i got to the skyhigh approval rating of 31%. not that funny.

you want to know something folks? >> i thought it was 29. gov kaisich: you know what, it didn't bother me. i didn't look at the polls because i wasn't in it to be popular. i was in it to try to fix the state. when you lead without poll taking, you know what happens? it is contagious. that people who work with you feel empowered. they feel like they can do things that are different and they are not chained to the status quo. in the first year i was at 31% approval. last year, we had an election in ohio. i 186 out of 88 counties. -- i won 86 out of 88

counties. cuyahoga county, which president obama one, i carried -- which president obama won i carried. you know why it happened? people felt better. they felt ohio was heading in the right direction and they responded to the leadership. leaders should be paying attention to the polls. i look at d.c. -- reader s- leaders shouldn't be paying attention to the polls. i look at d.c. and when i left there was a surplus. i have been on a crusade calling for a balanced budget amendment to the u.s. constitution. and i will tell you something, i have been doing this since i was 26 years old.

our children are at risk. our grandchildren are at risk. and yet we keep ringing up debt and congress seems to have no intention of being able to deal with this. if we didn't have a balanced budget requirement in ohio, we would be in the whole. -- in the hole. if we pass a logical balanced budget amendment with an exception for war or calamities, it would change the culture of washington. presidents, and presidents go in the debt keeps rising. we know across the country that if you don't manage your debt it will kill you. i am going to continue to travel all over america to do what i can to get a balanced budget amendment. you know what is interesting? it is the republicans who are

trying to kill it. they say that if we have a convention, god only knows what will happen. i say that i'm not sure if congress would pass a balanced budget if we got close to a convention, but coming out of a convention, 38 states have to ratify. i'm not sure 30 states would ratify mother's day these days. but saying i have to stay in a building that is on fire i might -- building that is on fire because i walk outside i might get hit by a meteor. art you sick of all the divisions in america? rich and poor. black and white. republicans and democrats. i'm right. you're wrong. you know what you're doing. -- you don't know what you are

doing. you know what the fact is? you think america is strong when all we do is fight with one another? america is strong when we are together. by the way, the only task force i know of in the country with community and police relations. i have a democratic african-american who is the cochairman of this task force along with our head of public safety. they have conducted meetings around the state about the issues of police and communities. you can't sweep this under the rug. when a majority of americans think that the system works against them, it cannot be ignored. we need to unite the country will stop when -- unite the country. we need to stop picking on one another in going into our own silos.

they say that no house divided can't stand. -- divided can stand. it is up to each of us to unite this country and and polarization by listening. we need more empathy, more understanding of somebody else's point of view. my great friend ron bellows who i worked on the b-2 bomber with, we couldn't agree on much, but we found two items to agree upon. and we are great friends. my friend chris shays always viewed as a moderate or liberal republican. he had his point of views and we accommodated it, didn't we chris? that is what america needs to be. america is to understand that they have a chance. it is up to the leaders in our country to communicate that every single human being

regardless of their circumstance has an opportunity to be successful. to be able to live the american dream. and that takes effort on the part of leaders to sometimes cross their own certain philosophy -- to put it this way, to cross their own interest groups. that is what we are all about. you don't have to give up your principles in the course. my feeling is, being able to give people a chance to become entrepreneurs is fantastic. if you don't like it, that is your problem, not mine. i am going to do it because i know that uniting people will work for our country and our state. finally, we have to restore these values that i call foundational values in our country. what are they? i'm not talking about the hot button issues.

one, personal responsibility. the dog ate my homework doesn't get it in america. personal responsibility. being able to accept that we all make mistakes, but accept personal responsibility and you will get better. resilience. everybody should get a trophy just because they show up. you have a big soccer team they have more trophies than they have kids. that's not the way life is. it is a rude awakening when you find out, where's my trophy? you call home and ask your mom it why did get a trophy today? -- ask your mom why you didn't get a trophy today. they knock you down, you get back up again. i was so glad this morning to

see my kids grade cards. they did great. they struggled with some subjects and they didn't lay down. hey girls, you did great. resilience really matters. empathy. there is a real attack on welfare. just dismiss these folks -- pull themselves up by their bootstraps. do you know what would be like to live in a single-family home with a couple kids where you get up in the morning and you don't want to leave your house because you hear gunshots? you never really knew who your father was?. you never had a role model that you can fashion your life about.

you don't know anything other than poverty, trouble, violence, drug dealers, the person who is mentally ill or drug addicted. it is across our country. it is not in one little area of our country. understand the challenge of coming back. understand the pain that somebody else has. walk in their shoes for a while and it will open your mind and allow us to be united. teamwork. they got off the barge right? i'll do my job, you do your job we will rush the beach and save the next generation. that is what america is about. it is about teamwork.

is about figuring out a way to be part of a great mosaic. family. is there a more important value than family in america? we have to stop kids from having kids. and finally, faith. faith is about the do's, not the don'ts. the lord has a purpose, find it, use it. those values are critical to restoring america. they have been critical to restoring ohio. people say, why are you here? i think it may be worth you hearing this from a guy that has been around for a long time. i love my state and i love my country and i want it to do better and better. not just for me but for my kids

and my kids'' kids. my country, we will be fine. [applause] [applause] host: the governor has agreed to take some questions. i would like to start off this morning. he spent some time with our students in the first question that came up was about foreign policy. i would like to ask you to give us his thoughts on foreign policy. gov. kaisich: what kind of question is that? give your thoughts on foreign policy? first of all, i think we have to recognize that america is a

special country with special values. if we don't want to recognize that, you can forget it. because we are a special country with special values, i think is very important that we are able to let the world know about our values. and i think what has been happening here over the last few years is the fact that we have retreated in the world. when we retreat, it creates a vacuum. when we retreat, what does that mean? it means our friends are not sure who we are in it even confuses our enemies and emboldens our enemies in a lot of ways. i think it is really important that we don't try to travel around the world remaking every country in the image of america. but it is important that we can assert ourselves. i think i was the first meeting republican that i know of in the

country to say that if you want to fight isis, you can't just do it from the air. we have to drive a coordinated effort and if it meets u.s. boots on the ground are necessary, so be it. we are not there to change the way these countries work, we are there to restore order. we are there to assert a lot of the values that we have that anybody has a right to live free. so if that is will we need to do, we do it, we go, and we get out. and we have to decide where we go based on u.s. interests. in my career, i had a chance to vote on the civil war in lebanon. i voted not to have troops on the ground. it is not an area where the united states should place themselves. i supported the first gulf war which was critical to us. i have a hard time understanding

-- let me tell you something i think about. i have a hard time convincing legislators of what i do and i can only imagine how difficult it is to work with the french, british, spanish italian's, to say that we need to have very tough sanctions against a guy that is trying to gobble up the territory of free people -- vladimir putin. it makes no sense. you have to assert your values and bring people along. you can't do it all by yourself. but we have the moral authority and standing to be leaders and bring people with us. and we have to do it and of course fight radical islam. that question, what do you think about foreign policy is like what you think about life? the united states has to be engaged in this world. without us, the world is in chaos.

all those books about america being out there and being arrogant, maybe that goes with the territory of being a leader, but we cannot slump in our job across this globe. >> thank you governor very much for being here. great job in ohio. [applause] i have to tell you, i never got a trophy either. my name is bob with aarp. i want to ask you a session on social security, not so much for myself, but for my children and their children. to strengthen social security or at least tell them they are

paying every month, will it be there for them? gov. kaisich: i once had a plan to deal with social security back when i was in the congress. it was to go to a wage based web -- a wage based rather than a wage and a price based approach. that would put them in a position to be able to make such security sound. i think george bush had a plan similar to that. it was kind of rejected and now as you get farther and farther down the road, the challenges get greater and greater. i don't have a social security plan in front of me, but it is going to have to be changed. we should not look at this as a meat cleaver. we should think about a better way to design all of these systems. medicare, for example. let me tell you about what we're doing in ohio for medicare or medicaid.

right now, the health care system is fundamentally run on the basis of quantity not quality. we had a program where we gave a children's hospital money to deal with asthma. we found out that we were successful. hospitals had fewer visits because they kept kids out of the hospital. so they had less revenue. the insurance companies didn't pay as many claims so they had more revenue. we were able to get the insurance companies and the hospitals to share the benefit so that we keep kids healthy and drive down the cost of medicine. everybody is a winner. we had to think creatively in that way. let's figure out this system. but it has to be changed. we can't say that you can't tinker with it, that is putting your head in the sand. anybody who wants to be president ought to be asked this question and if they are not

willing to deal with it, they opt to be -- deal with it, they are not fit for office. should i decide one way or the other, i will have a plan for you. let me just say one more thing about balancing the budget like with medicaid. the federal government should set goals. they should stop giving us prescriptions out here about how to do things. they ought to say, we have some goals and states, you go ahead and do it. when judd was governor, he could figure out exactly how to reengineer a program. in our job training programs, which are vital to train people in the 21st century for new technology, you have to be unemployed to get the bulk of the money so that you can then get employed. why don't they give the money

that i need so that i can train people on the job and they don't have to lose their job to get another job. you have people jumping over the fence at the white house, our secret service is in disarray the v.a. can't figure out how to pay claims. can we see what is happening? they are trying to do too much, they do very little well. they need to do things at the federal level that we can't do for ourselves. that will help us get to a balanced budget and help re-energize our state, community, and people. [applause] >> it was a pleasure working with you when i was in the house . and we worked on the commission that tried to cut 2% from the federal government budget and we failed.

what i enjoyed about you then was that you were always a straight shooter. i want to give you an opportunity to be a straight shooter with us here this morning. gov. kaisich: i don't know i like where this is going. [laughter] >> i would like you to tell us, what are your detractors saying about you, why are they wrong and in what instances maitre d'right -- instances may they be right? gov. kaisich: i don't know if i have any detractors. [laughter] it is a good question. sometimes people say that he is not disciplined and not focused. how do you go from $8 billion in the hole to a $2 billion surplus and the loss of 200 -- the loss of 350,000 jobs to a gain of almost 350,000 jobs.

dramatic education returns helping the poor. have you do that if you are not focused -- how do you do that if you are not focused? i have a lot of energy. but you don't have all the energy and the push, how do you get things done? the other thing is, i am always in the future. i have always think about what can be. ideas bring excitement. i don't care fits in business, sports, politics, or religion. look at how this pope is shaking up the world because of his ideas about how things should happen. you spend a short time with me and you might think wow, what do we have here? i have an energetic guy and i'm not going to change it. h will probably change some of it. --age will probably change some of it.

i make mistakes, but i try to figure out what i can do to make things a little bit better. i am the farthest thing from sainthood, but that is my goal in life. shake things off and try to do better. my wife told the one-time," you are the leader, you are the dad now, act like it. " the interesting thing about politics is if you are having fun people don't like it. they resent it. one other final thing. do you know why i am unorthodox? because i am normal. ok? [applause] >> thank you governor.

thank you for being here. [applause] [applause] >> coming up on c-span, the u.s. house debates the 2016 republican budget proposal. then president obama hosts a joint news conference with the visiting afghan president. after that, ohio governor john kasich, a potential 2016 republican candidate, speaks in new hampshire. on the next washington journal congressman frank lobiondo of new jersey, a member of the armed services and intelligence committee, is here to discuss the war powers debate and the u.s. isis strategy.

after that, congressman tim ryan of ohio talks about the house debate on the 2016 gop budget proposal. later, a look at the fiscal health of states and the impact of congress and washington on state budgets. our guests are the tennessee state treasurer and washington state treasurer. live every morning on 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span. and you can join the conversation with your calls comments on facebook and twitter. wednesday, the afghan president addresses a joint meeting of congress. you can see his remarks live from the u.s. house of representatives at 10:45 a.m. eastern time here on c-span. >> here are some of our featured

programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on c-span two's book tv, author peter wallace and says that government housing -- peter wallison says that government housing policies cause the financial crisis and it could happen again. then sunday at 5:00 eastern jeffrey sachs. in saturday morning at 1030 eastern on american history tv on c-span3, a discussion on the final speeches of abraham lincoln and martin luther king jr.. then sunday afternoon on " real america," -- e-mail us at commen ts@cspan.org.

join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> the u.s. house open debate on the republican budget plan tuesday. the proposal aims to balance the budget in 10 years by reducing spending by $5.5 trillion. the bill calls for the repeal of the affordable care act. it also makes cuts to medicare medicaid, food stamps, and other programs. this portion of monday's debate is just over two hours. they've done. mr. chairman, i'm so proud and pleased to join my budget committee colleagues and conference member colleagues on this side of the aisle to present a balanced budget for a stronger america. you know, when i talk with folks back home in the district, sixth district of georgia, across the state of georgia and truly across this country, individuals are

concerned. they're very concerned. many of them are angry. most are frustrated about the direction of america. they feel we're adrift, that washington seems incapable of addressing their concerns, that federal government's getting in the way or impeding the very spirit of the people. and the president's response in his budget, more faxes more spending -- more taxes, more spending, more borrowing, more debt, more stagnant growth and a budget that never, ever, ever balances. remember, mr. chairman, the american people know this. every dollar that's taken for taxes and every dollar that is borrowed, stealing from next generation is a dollar that can't be used to pay the rent, to buy a car, to buy a home, to send a kid to college, to open a business or to expand a business and create jobs. we think there's a better way. and framing that issue, as

folks report, is our introduction in which we say this. it's often said that a budget is more than a dry collection of numbers and budgeting more than a mechanical act. with respect to the congressional budget, no one's put it better than the renowned political scientist, aaron vildosky when he said taxing and spending resourcing mobilization and resource allocation now take up as much more time on the floors of congress than all other matters put together. how large government will be, the part it will play in our lives whether more or less will be done for defense or welfare, how much and what sort of people will pay for the services what kind of society and some we americans want to have. all these are routinely discussed in budget debates. this resolution proceeds from that conviction. it seeks to restore fundamental principles of budgeting and governing, to reverse the drift toward higher spending and larger government, to reinforce the innovative and creative

spirit stiring among the myriad institutions and communities across this country and to revitalize the prosperity that creates ever-expanding opportunities for all americans to pursue their destinies. put differently, this budget resolution expresses a vision, a vision of governing and of america itself. . what is that vision? mr. chairman, we believe in promoting the greatest amount of opportunity and the greatest amount of success for the greatest number of americans so the greatest number of american dreams may be realized. and doing so in a way that demonstrates real hope and real compassion and real fairness without washington picking winners and losers. now, americans just have a common sense about them and they understand something isn't right, especially with our debt. very troubling. over $18 trillion. they know that we can't spend more money that we take in

forever. they can't do it in their personal lives. they can't do it in their families or businesses or communities. and we can't do it right here in congress. in fact the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said a few years ago, admiral mike mullen, the highest ranking military officer in our country, he was asked what's the greatest threat to national security? the highest ranking military officer in our country. asked what the greatest threat was, and he said the national debt. because he knows what americans know. that unless we have economic security we will never have national security. so instead of the insecurity and uncertainty of the president's plan, we think there's a better way. what are our highlights? we balance the budget in less than 10 years and we do so without raising taxes. our budget reduces spending by $5.5 trillion. it stays in balance and sets us on a path to pay off that debt, all of it. we provide for a vote on the balanced budget amendment in the house of representatives. this congress, something that folks back home just think makes

sense. we support a strong national defense, providing resources above the president's number when taking into account the base defense budget and the global war on terror funding. we repeal obamacare in its entirety. as a physician i can tell you it's not just harming the health of america, it's harming the economy of america. we stop the raid on medicare. we eliminate the independent payment advisory board where a board of individuals cannot pay your doctor, seniors' doctors for caring for them. we promote patient centered health care where patients and families and doctors are making medical decisions not washington d.c. we secure economic opportunity. we call for fair and simple and comprehensive tax reform to get this economy rolling again and get millions of americans back to work. we repeal dodd frank and end the too big to fail bank bailouts. we reform fannie and freddie, cut corporate welfare. we promote federalism. the letter sent from governors

across this state recently said, quote, over the last several decades the federal government has passed laws and promulgated regulation that is restrict the ability of states to innovate while requiring states to implement and run programs dictated by federal dollars and federal rules. for a long time states were willing to trade off power and responsibility for federal taxpayer funds, but we have reached a tipping point where states serve to carry out the wishes of the federal government instead of laboratories of democratcy. we give states flexibility. flexibility in medicaid and nutritional assistance. we return control of education to state and local governments. we hold washington kibble, reducing the size of the work force through attrition and selling federal assets and unneeded federal lands. we call for regulatory reform to free up small business and job creation across this land. and we require fee collecting

programs in the federal government to account for that revenue in our own appropriations process so the people's representatives can have a say about how that money is spent. we cut waste and fraud and abuse, end the double dipping in disability insurance and unemployment insurance. we require able-bodied adults of working age to work to receive federal welfare benefits. we support the rights of conscience for doctors and health care providers and employers, and we push back on the compkive overreach of this administration. we stop the president's car on coal. prevent -- war on coal. we hold the i.r.s. accountable for targeting american taxpayers. mr. chairman, this is a positive vision for our country. it will deliver real results for the american people. we responsibly lay out a path for a healthy economy, an opportunity economy, one that opens doors for people not subjects them to the dictates of washington, d.c. you see, mr. chairman, we believe in america. and we believe in americans.

we understand our problems are significant and we hear the people of this nation crying out for leadership here in washington, d.c. the balanced budget for a stronger america will result in a government that's more efficient, more effective, and more accountable. one that frees up the american spirit and optimism and enthusiasm to do great things and meet great challenges. and we encourage our colleagues and fellow citizens across this country to join us in this exciting opportunity. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to start by thanking the chairman of the committee, chairman price, for conducting the business of the budget committee in a professional manner. we have sharp differences but have expressed them in a civil fashion. i also want to agree with him with respect to the great job the budget committee staff has done, both democrat and republican.

and agree with them on one more thing and it may be the last thing i agree with the gentleman on during this debate, but dr. elmendorf, the current head of the congressional budget office has done a great job and we'll have more to say about that later. we all believe in america. but i do not believe this republican budget reflects the values and priorities. it's the wrong direction for america. now, as we gather here today, we are facing some good news. we are facing some bad news. and we are facing some really bad news. the good news is the economy is improving. more people are going back to work. in fact, the private sector has added 12 million new jobs over the last 60 months. it's not all rosy. many americans are still looking for work, but the unemployment rate has fallen to 5.5% and trends are good.

the bad news is that americans are working harder than ever but their paychecks are flat. this is not a new problem, mr. speaker. it's not even a problem in the last two years or just the last five years. it goes back quite a ways. in fact, as this chart indicates we have seen a growing gap between worker productivity, which has been rising steadily, and the incomes and paychecks of most working americans. the if you look at this chart it's very interesting. it goes from 1948 to the 1970's. you see these two lines are convergent. that means the additional worker productivity, the hard work of american workers, was translated into higher paychecks and compensation for them. but starting around the 1970's you saw the great divergence. worker productivity went up. people are working harder than ever, better than ever.

but their paychecks and compensation had been pretty much flat. so where is the value of that hard work going? if people are working harder than ever, why aren't their paychecks keeping track? well, that additional value of hard work is no longer going to regular working americans. people working for a paycheck. it's gone overwhelmingly to folks at the top. i don't mean just the top 10. it's gone overwhelmingly to the top 1% of americans who have seen their incomes rise dramatically even as everybody else has pretty much been running in place and flat. so our challenges to all those people working really hard, harder than ever how can we make sure that they benefit from that increased productivity? mr. speaker, we had some hope right after the november election. i remember opening up the

newspaper, the "wall street journal," there was an op-ed piece. by speaker boehner and the republican senate leader mitch mcconnell. and here's what they said. they said that they were humbled by the opportunity to quote, help struggling middle class americans and to deal with wage stagnation. that's what they said right after the election. but, mr. speaker, the very bad news today for the country is if you look at this republican budget, turns out they were just kidding. this republican budget is really hard on hardworking americans. and those who are looking hard to find a job. it says, keep working harder, but you're going to get less. it will do nothing, nothing to increase paychecks and take-home pay for working families. in fact, it squeezes them even harder and tighter.

it will increase the tax burden on millions of families. those in the middle class and those working hard to join the middle class. amazingly it just drops the higher education tax credits. it ends the boost in the child tax credit. millions of americans lose access to affordable care tax credits. it's not just working families. students who are working hard to try and get a job, they are going to find college even less affordable that today. this republican budget cuts student loans. it increases the cost of student loans. starts charging students interest while they are still in college. it cuts $90 billion from pell, mandatory and more. not just students and working families, seniors. seniors who have worked hard to

secure a financial -- a healthy retirement, they are going to see their costs go up, immediately. prescription drugs will cost more. co-payments for preventive health services go up right away. nursing home care will get much more expensive as they cut $90 billion out of medicaid, 2/3 of which goes to help seniors and disabled individuals. most of the rest goes to families with kids. then they turn medicare into a voucher program that will reduce medicare benefits. it so while this republican budget squeezes hardworking families increases the cost of college for students, squeezes seniors, higher costs for them it's great for those who are already at the top 1%.

it's great for millionaires. in fact, this budget paves the way for the romney-ryan plan to cut the tax rate for millionaires. by a third. paves the way, green lights it. if you look at this budget, it's based on a failed and disproven economic theory. topdown, trickle-down economics the same old theory, the theory that complieded with the real world under president bush. in the 2000s, right? cut the top tax rate. here he was the benefits will trickle down and lift everybody up. guess what? incomes of the top 1%, they went up. everybody else ran aground. yachts went up, everybody else's boat went down. deficits went up. everybody else was running in place or fell behind.

and here's the thing, while this republican budget makes life harder right away for hardworking americans life will get harder immediately. it also disinvests in our future. it slashes the part of the budget we use to invest in our kids' education. from early education and head start to k through 12 and beyond. it's a sad day when we start chopping away at the ladder of opportunity in this country. it will also devastate the investments our country has historically made in scientific research and innovation, investments that have helped power our economy and keep us at the cutting edge of world technology. guess what else? it provides no solution, no answer to the fact that in just a few months in may we are going to face a shortfall in the transportation trust fund that will result in a construction

slow down this summer. does nothing. -- does nothing about that in the budget. 8 says we'll come up with something after today, in a couple months. . so mr. speaker, when i say this budget disinvests in america, it's not rhetoric, it's a mathematical reality. i want people to look at this chart. this is a chart of the share of our economy that we spend on the investment portion of our budget, investment in our kids' education investment in scientific research like the medical research to help find treatments and cures to diseases like cancer, diabetes other diseases that plague american families. here's what the republican budget does, it takes that investment budget and throws it off the cliff, off the cliff to the point that it's 40% below the lowest level as a share of

the economy. since we've been keeping records in the late 1950's. here's a country that invested in the g.i. bill. we invested in our infrastructure, the national highway system. we've invested in our kids' education. this republican budget disinvests in america. so it cuts all those things. i tell you one thing it doesn't cut, it doesn't cut one single tax break for the purpose of reducing the deficit. not one penny. not one penny reduces the deficit. we hear the highest priorities, reduce the deficit, but yes, let's cut our investment in education. yeah, let's cut our investment in innovation. let's not fund the transportation trust fund. but we're not going to cut one single tax break for the purpose of reducing the deficit.

not for corporate jets, not for hedge fund owners. not one. so despite all that and despite the deep cuts it makes in our investment, the reality is this budget doesn't balance. it doesn't balance. not by a long shot, mr. speaker . this budget takes budget cadillacery to new heights. it claims -- clackery to new heights. it claims to repeal the affordable care act but it uses the revenues and savings from the affordable care act to claim balance after 10 years. senator enzi, the new republican chairman of the senate budget committee, said that was kind of a budget accounting that he didn't think was right. heritage foundation you know, they called that question as well in comments last time this came up. here's the other thing. the budget doesn't account for the almost $1 trillion in tax

extenders that our republican colleagues brought to the floor last fall and are on the way of bringing it to the floor now. $1 trillion. if you add that to the deficit, which is real money it's even farther out of balance. and then they go and claim a deficit dividend based on fan thom deficit reductions. -- phanthom deficit reductions. this is in the 10th year when they say their budget is balanced by $33 billion. well it's not. if you take out the affordable care act savings, if you add in the tax extenders, costs that our republican colleagues keep bringing to the floor, you don't come close to balance. not close, mr. speaker. this balanced budget stuff, it just isn't true. it's just not true.

it would make enron accountants blush. so i think mr. speaker, most americans would agree that this budget, cutting tax rates for the very wealthy while increasing the tax burden on working families raising the cost of seniors, raising the cost of students, cutting vital investments will even stack the deck more in favor of the very wealthy and very powerful and make it harder on everyone else to get ahead. mr. speaker, we can do better we can do much better and democrats will propose a budget that promotes a more rapidly growing economy with more broadly shared prosperity. that will be the right direction for america. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from maryland reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: thank you, mr. chairman. so much misinformation just presented and we'll work through that over the course of

the next three hours as we debate this bill, but i guess the most disheartening thing is the -- is the rhetoric that divides the american people. this is a time for the country to come together and solve the challenges that we have. the individual that have been leading in that is the current chairman of the ways and means committee, past chairman of the budget committee, i'm proud to yield four minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin mr. ryan. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for four minutes. mr. ryan: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to tip my hat to the new budget chairman. it's a difficult job putting bauget together. i did it for four years. and so i thank the gentleman for bringing an outstanding budget to the floor. first of all, this is a budget to be proud of. this is a budget that makes our country stronger. this is a budget that balances. you know, it's pretty important to note that hardworking taxpayers, the people that elected us here to represent them, they have to live within

their means. well, so should government. that's the basic decision here. and so when you take a look at the budget being considered here, we basically want the government to get back in the business of being honest with people about our finances. here's the problem, mr. chairman. our government is making promises to people in this country that it knows it can't keep. that's dishonesty. what this budget does is it puts our budget back on track so that the government can keep these promises, the promises that people are organizing their lives around. what the gentleman from maryland and the president's budget says, just keep race razing taxes. tax more. by the way that's not enough we need to borrow more and spend more. that seems to be the path to prosperity to them and look at where we are. highest poverty rate in a

generation. our economy is growing below 2% in some cases below 3% which is what we're supposed to be growing at. the gentleman, i just listened to his rhetoric. he says this slices, this slashes, we're chopping away at opportunity. here's what this budget does. instead of increasing spending on average, like the president's budget does at 5.1%, it does that at 3.4%. so we're saying let's get the government to live within its means. government spending will still increase on average 3.4% a year instead of 5.1% a year. i guess that's the difference between whether people can live the american dream or not, whether we're slashing our chopping or doing all these horrible, awful things to people. mr. chairman, just don't by this overheated rhetoric. the problem is we've got to balance the budget, we've got to get this debt under control. we see the storm clouds on the

horizon -- in the horizon and what this budget does is it gets the government to be honest with the taxpayers that give us the money in the first place so we can balance the budget and get this debt on the right track. we invest in the right way by giving people their own money so they can make decisions what's right for their family, instead of having washington run it all. now, there's one last thing i'd like to say. as i get carried away on the rhetoric, the c.b.o. is an agency we use quite a bit here. and the congressional budget office is a very important government agency that gives us all of our cost estimates. this budget is written on their estimates. and for the last six years we've had a director at the congressional budget office by the name of doug elmendorf who has done an outstanding job as director of the c.b.o. i've worked very closely with mr. elmendorf, dr. elmendorf, and with c.b.o. in my prior capacity. he was a democratic appointee,

but the c.b.o. director is supposed to call the balls and the strikes and play it fair. doug elmendorf has done that, and so i just simply want to say for the record, mr. chairman, that we wish him well. he's leaving at the end of the month. we wish him well. we thank him for his service. we thank the congressional budget office for all the hard work that they put in so we can be here on the floor with these budgets, and we wish him great success in the future in whatever it is he chooses and thank him for the service to this house, to this congress and to our country. and with that, mr. chairman, i simply want to say, this is an outstanding budget that deserves our support. don't buy all the hype you're hearing from the other side and pass this fantastic price budget. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. speaker. i listened to my friend and the former chairman and his remarks. the reality is that the president's proposal the democratic proposal, we don't

increase tax rates but, yes, we do get rid of some of the tax loopholes in the tax code that are riddled with preferences that are there not because they make america more productive but because someone had a powerful lobbyist who is getting a special interest break for them. right. if you think about it, if the government provides a grant of $1,000 to somebody, that's $1,000 in value but if i say to you you know of the taxes you have to pay i'll give you a special break so it's $1,000 less, that's a pretty good deal too. and the reality is we spend $1.4 trillion, according to the congressional budget office, each year on tax expenditures. more than on social security. now, some of those are for good purposes, good public policy purposes, but some of them are for like, corporate jets, some of them are for hedge fund managers. and here's the thing yeah, we think we can good rid some of

those tax breaks to reduce the long-term deficit, our colleagues would just prefer to devastate our investments in education and other areas. you know, math is math, to the former chairman. the reality is, and he knows it, that the portion of the budget we use to make these investments, the republican budget does absolutely cut that to 40% below the lowest level of the share of the economy since we've been keeping records. that's a fact. another reality is that this republican budget doesn't balance unless you're using phony math. i'm now very pleased to yield three minutes to the gentlelady from wisconsin, a great member of the budget committee, ms. moore. the chair: the gentlelady from wisconsin is recognized for three minutes. ms. moore: i thank you so much and thank the ranking member for yielding to me. i want to add my voice to those, congratulate everybody on the budget committee, particularly the chair and the ranking member, for their hard work and the staff that we put into this labor. i could tell you that i was

indeed shocked, even though i've been on the budget committee for several cycles, i continue to be shocked at the -- at how this budget does not reflect what i call democratic values. and i mean democratic, not as a democratic party but as our democracy. i believe that our democracy is really at risk when we put forth such a budget. i think that this budget hallows out the middle class and based on the constructs we've seen in the past, it would raise taxes on middle-class families. i'm talking about those people earning modest incomes $50,000 to $75,000 a year, by $2,000 a year. and of course it abandons the poor. of the 5.5 trillion dollars 69% of this is on the backs of hoes -- of those who are the

most poor, most vulnerable. who do we care about in this budget? this budget pulls up the ladder of opportunity from our kids. that next generation that is going to make our economy work they're doing us a favor by trying to go to college but yet we cut pell grants in this republican budget by somewhere around $90 billion. it deconstructs our job-creating infrastructure investment by $187 billion. usually a time when the transportation budget was a bipartisan thing, but in the name of balancing a budget we even throw these workers under the bus. it pulls the lifeline from seniors disabled, kids by block granting our medicaid program and cutting $ 13

billion, -- $913 billion, that $2 trillion from health care a lifeline by repealing the affordable care act and all this in the name of a phony balancing of the budget. it depends -- we're going to see a display here at some point. i don't know what you call it, the king of the hill, the queen of the hill budget, the "price is right" budget. i don't know. where we're either going to have $94 billion or $96 billion in a slush fund the overseas account that's $36 billion $38 billion above what the generals and the president say they need for war and we're not going to take one dime away from the one -- can i just have 30 seconds? mr. van hollen: i yield the gentlelady another 130ekds. ms. moore: that's $1.4 trillion

of entitlements that we spend through the tax code for gas and oil subsidies jets, hedge fund managers. there's talk in this budget of eliminating the estate tax. millionaires and billionaires are benefiting. tax income from c.e.o. pay, and yet we think that balancing the budget -- mr. van hollen: i yield the gentlelady another 15 seconds. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. . ms. moore: don't believe the hype. this is not a democratic budget as americans have come to know it and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from georgia is

recognized. mr. price: this appears to be a common theme moving forward with this rhetoric and dividing american against american, not just positive. the gentleman from maryland said it's all about math and mathis math and he is right. we spend $12,000 per american. it doesn't work. what's it get you? this is what it gets you. this is the debt-to-gross domestic product in this nation. the red line is where the debt's going. this is the democrat plan right here. that is what will cost our country. our friends are sticking their heads in the sand. this destroys lives and destroys every american. we stand for all americans. we believe having a balanced budget for a stronger america is the way to solve these

challenges. we believe is important to save strengthen and secure the programs that are so vital to the american people. the gentleman has been working on this as vice chairman rokita. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rokita: i thank my colleagues for their hard work. it is nice to have this honest conversation with the american people. the whole goal here is to allow the opportunity for americans to build better lives for themselves and their families. not for the federal government to attempt to provide that better life, because, mr. chairman, after 50 years of the war on poverty, for example, we know that the federal government can't do the job. a lot of rhetoric out there. certainly, mr. chairman not

positive and not right either. it's just plain wrong. we talk about hard work. you know what's hard work? getting the competing priorities in a continuing assertion of our limited monies in terms of our mandatory spending to get a budget to balance in 10 years. yet again, this budget committee and this house of representatives has a plan to do it and unlike you've heard to do it honestly. what's not hard work? what's a lot easier to do is to never balance. and this chart shows that. the president's budget never balances ever. of course, mr. chairman, you know you can't start paying down the $18 trillion of debt that we have with another $100 trillion. we do it in a responsible,

logical 10-year window. the federal budget is very big. it's like an aircraft carrier. you have to turn it and turn it decisively, but it doesn't turn on a dime. and that's what we show here and that's what we do here and again, it's hard work. it's hard work as i mentioned earlier because as time goes on more and moreover our $3 trillion are spent on programs that are going to bankrupt us. if we don't save for future generations, no one will take advantage of medicaid, medicare and social security. i know we put money into those programs, but on average we only put about 30% into them, medicare, for example. and that 70% delta goes on the backs of our children and grandchildren, a lot of whom

haven't been born. talk about taxation without representation. our budget solves this problem. we have the ability and we on the committee have had the honesty to have this direct, forth right conversation with the american people. frankly now, for five years. the worst thing we could have done was to turn tail and run and not have this honest conversation. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. rokita: we did it five years ago. we continue to do it. and i'm encouraged, mr. chairman. i think the american people see the light. they see that unless we correct and reform this mandatory overspending, that one can be helped. we can't have americans building better lives for themselves, but be more dependent on the federal government and in doing so more and more people will be hurt.

slush fund no. a very important fund to fight the global war on terror, to keep our troops safe and effective, that's an important fund. i wouldn't call it a slush fund and i wouldn't call dependency on broken programs good, positive either. republicans on the budget committee, republicans in this congress, i hope all of us eventually will have the courage and ability to have not only have this conversation with the american people, but to start putting this conversation into direct action. mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm a little surprised the gentleman from indiana brought up what's called the funding -- these are the funds in the oversees contingency account for overseas contingencies like wars

and other contingencies that come up. the reality is what the republican budget does here is create a slush fund out of the oversees contingency account. it sends a signal we are confused about how top fund our defense obligations and it's in total violation of what the budget committee itself stood for for years. i want to read, mr. speaker, from the 2015 republican budget. just a year ago, but we got real amnesia among our republican colleagues. here's what they said in their report. abuse of the cap adjustment is a backdoor loophole that undermines the integrity of the budget process. the budget committee will exercise its oversight responsibilities with respect to the use of oco. the budget committee will oppose

levels that our military commanders say are needed unless it can be clearly demonstrated that such accounts are war-related. i didn't write that, but the republican colleagues put it in the report. it's like whew, didn't mean it. so i'm baffled that our colleagues keep bringing this up. total violation of what the budget committee has always stood for on a bipartisan basis. i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from new york, ranking member of the small business committee and great friend to entrepreneurs around the country, ms. va last quezz. mr. valadao: i thank the -- >> i oppose the budget that would cut the legs out from our nation's small businesses. this would mean $10 billion

cuts. taken together this reduction will mean 190,000 fewer jobs created. for many will be business owners and entrepreneurial development centers to provide critical training and guidance. and yet this budget will shortchange those programs removing local resources that allow small businesses to take root and grow in our community. nationally, small business development centers and women business development centers will see cuts of $195 million. this will mean, 16,000 fewer small businesses are able to launch, while 150,000 existing small companies will be deprived assistance that helps their growth. beyond technical assistance, small businesses need capital to expand.

sadly this budget undermines credit programs. new york city alone will see a $22.5 million in micro loans. do you know that 62% of micro businesses by low-income women with a default of less than 3%. shame on us. this lending helps the small businesses create opportunity. so, it only makes sense that this budget, which targets the most vulnerable would slash this program too. small businesses will suffer in other ways. for many small businesses having the federal government as a customer can mean significant revenue and job creation opportunity. under this plan, small business contract awards will be reduced

by $142 billion, lowering job creation by 2.1 million positions. new york city companies would lose out on losing out on federal work. republicans like to position themselves as small business champions. however, supporting small firms take more than lip service. it requires wise investments in programs promoting entrepreneurship. this budget slashes those programs and i urge my colleagues to reject it. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from maryland reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i was amused by my friend's comments about the global on -- war on terror fund understanding that in 2015 2014

and 2013 for those fiscal years, he voted for the appropriations bills that included the defense money and the levels were $91.9 billion that the gentleman voted for. i'm pleased -- mr. van hollen: would the gentleman yield? mr. price: maybe later. i'm placed to yield to a member of the budget committee from california mr. mcclintock. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcclintock: we need to discuss the budget under the growing shadow of unprecedented debt that has literally doubled in the last eight years. with crushing debt comes rowinous interest costs that the c.b.o. warns that will exceed our military budget in the current decade. the budget produced by chairman price's house budget committee

meets our current defense demands by adding additional money into the war account, but i would reassure the ranking member member that it funds that increase to a decrease in other spending. that will hold us on a trajectory to balance the budget in less than 10 years and paying down the unprecedented debt this administration has run up. this plan is met with opposition by defense hawks who want extra spending, but who don't want to go through the fuss and bother of paying for it. and therein lies the problem. this is not just a one-year increase because it increases defense spending without making other cuts, it changes the overall spending trajectory over the next 10 years. and here's the simple math of the matter. this adds more than $20 billion for total spending this year and it in effect, repudiates the

budget plan for additional reductions next year. and on this new trajectory that these budget hawks would set, there would be no balanced budget in 10 years even if we enacted every other reform called for in the budget. after 10 years, we will still be running deficits and nearly $100 billion and interest costs will have eaten us alive. it is so important to pass the budget committee intact without the amendments being proposed. i'm curious how the self-proclaimed defense hawks plan to defend our country when our credit is shot and our debt service is approaching $100 trillion a year. they forget in the spring of 1945, carrying a debt proportional to the one we have today, there was serious doubt whether we could conduct the war for another year. when he was chairman of the

joint chiefs of staff admiral mike mullen warned that in his professional military judgment, the greatest threat to our national security is the national debt. he made that he made that warning five years and $4.5 trillion of debt ago. history warns us that countries that bankrupt themselves aren't around very long. before you can provide for the common defense, you have to be able to pay for it and theable of our nation to do so is coming into doubt. this budget offers us a narrow path out of debt while continuing to fund the military at the requested levels, and its adoption, intact, is essential to our short-term and long-term needs. we have a stark choice before us. pay for the needed increase in defense by reducing other spending, or refuse to pay for those increases and sacrifice the long-term security and prosper i have to our country on

the altar of instant gratification. aamongst the most chilling words in history are attributed to louie xv. after us, the flood. let that not -- to louis xv. after us, the flood. let that not be the epitaph of congress. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: the gentleman is right a about this oko slush fund. and the chairman is right, i did support the oco money at the level requested by the president and the joint chiefs of staff, our military commanders. it was higher a couple of years ago because we had tens of thousands more troops in after began tan -- afghanistan. the gentleman may rethat we brought a lot of troops home. as a result of twheark don't need as much money in our war account, the overseas

contingency account. so what i did mr. speaker, is exactly what our republicans -- our republican colleagues on the budget committee said we should do at that time. in other words, i opposed increases above the levels the administration and military commanders say were needed to carry out those operations. yes i did support a budget level at the level the president and our military commanders said was necessary. but as mr. mcclintock said, the republican budget does just the opposite. it does what we said we would not do and i say we, republicans democrats alike. so it's important to heed our own words otherwise we will as the budget committee itself said, we will undermine the integrity of the budget process. that was the point mr. mcclintock was making as well. i now yield three minutes to the gentleman from oregon the

ranking member of the transportation and infrastructure committee, somebody who knows we have to fund the mornedization of our country's infrastructure, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. defazio: let's depart from a little bit of the acrimony, the acronyms, let's be concrete. let's talk about infrastructure investment and what the republican budget would do. we're running a deficit this year, we fall off a cliff at the end of may and if we don't put up $10 billionmark states will cancel project this is summer. that's not the subject of this budget. this budget is for next year. what are they doing for the long-term? they're going to reform the highway trust fund. thank you very much, i appreciate that. they're going to limit the expenditures out of funds to future income.

we've been supplementing it because the income is not adequate. but no, no more general funds, you live on the income. what does that mean? it means in this budget, put forward by these people, there would be a 99% cut in state funding. no, not exaggerating 99%. because basically the money is paying for past obligations, past projects for the states. when the states finish a project, they get reimbursed. while they're building it, they don't. under their tpwhudget fiscal year 2016, your state department of transportation will get 99% less federal funds. it kind of has a pretty big impact in some states here. if you're a -- in a bright yellow state you're over 0 -- 70% dependent on federal funds, in a light green 49% to 59%. the chairman of the committee, georgia, they would get $1.1

billion less. i guess georgia doesn't need the money. the the roads congest on around atlanta, not a problem. the speaker's state would get $1.2 billion less thunder budget. california $3.2 billion less, the majority leader, and louisiana, the whip, $619 million less. these are facts. that's the actual impact of the proposed budget. it digs a hole so deep we'll never get out of it. what happens after the first year of their reform of the trust fund? well, actually, unless we pass a long-term bill with new funding which they are quite resistant to thus far, it would mean 30% less funding than today for all states and 60% cut in surface transportation. we already have a system with 147,000 bridges that need repair or total replacement. 40% of the surface on the national highway system is in such bad condition it has to be dug up, not just resurfaced.

none of that. no. major work. and a $75 billion backlog in transit systems, our legacy systems are so obsolete they're killing people right here in the nation's capital people are dying unnecessarily because they can't afford to bring in modern cars without the federal partnership. we held a hearing just last week in the committee and we heard from the governor of north carolina red state, red governor, mayor of salt lake, and the transportation director from wyoming they all say the federal partnership is absolutely critical and you're going to reduce it to 1%. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. >> i thank the chairman, i would note for the -- mr. price: i thank the chairman i would say if he reads the resolution we accommodate for appropriate funding in section 510 with. the deficit neutral reserve

fund, we accommodate for paying for it, for transportation and infrastructure, because we believe it's a priority, we believe it's a priority for the american people. i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from arkansas, mr. westerman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. westerman: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. chairman for your leadership. americans know this country was built on a strong work ethic. this budget provides a framework to create projects if for able bodied working age adults receiving federal benefit. some may ask, why work requirements? in 1996, president clinton a fellow arkansasian from my hometown of hot springs, but from across the aisle said, today we are taking a historic chance to make welfare what it is meant to be -- a second chance, not a way of life. the goal of work force requirements on able bodied working age adults is to give

americans a hand up, not a hand out. mr. speaker, we should be concerned about the negative effects these federal benefit programs are having on our american work ethic when we review the day tafment the maximum an individual can earn and still receive government assistance under some programs according to the u.s. department of health and human services, is only $1,000. the cato institute reports that in 39 states individuals can make more on government assistance than by working an eight--- an $8 per hour job. in six states government benefits pay more than a $12 per hour job. in eight state, government assistance pays more than the average salary of an american teacher. in my home state, where medicaid expansion was accepted, 40% of the able bodied working agent -- age adults receiving 100% funded medicaid have zero income. by adding work force requirement requirements for able bodied

working age adults in the medicaid population alone this budget establishes a blueprint for work requirements that will result in savings by 2022 of up to $376 billion federally with an additional $170 billion saved at the state level. president franklin roosevelt made clear in a 1935 address to congress that these programs were not intended to be an entitlement, but a temporary aid to those in need. he said the lessons of history confirmed by the evidence immediately before me show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. to dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic. a sult dell stroyer of the human spirit. it is inimical to the dictates of sound policy it is in violation of the ideals of

america. work must be found for able-bodied, destitute workers. the principles that president clinton and president roosevelt before him promoted are more important now than ever before as we find ourselves in a fiscal crisis. president clinton reminded us in 1996 that this is not the end of welfare reform, this is the beginning. we all have to assume responsibility. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. westerman: this budget incentivizes work, not dependence. it reduces spending growth instead of growing government. this budget moves us in the right direction. i encourage my friends on both sides of the tile strengthen america by voting for this balanced budget for a stronger working america. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. this republican budget strips

away provisions that are in existence today to make work pay. child tax credits for working families they get rid of the bump up. they get rid of the enhanced earned income tax credit for working families. as i said they get rid of the higher education deduction for families so that they can send their kids to school. i also want to say a word about the transportation trust fund because as the ranking member thearks senior democrat on the transportation infrastructure committee just pointed out this republican budget has no provision inside the budget numbers for dealing with the crisis we're going to face in a few months. now the chairman of the committee mentioned the deficit neutral reserve fund, section 510, i'm looking at it now. deficit neutral reserve funds can play an important role in

signaling a policy direction. after all, these are 10-year budgets. and i would understand if we didn't know exactly what we're going to do, our transportation trust fund 10 years from now or nine years from now but we're talking about 1 1/2 months from now. we're talking about in the year, first year of this budget. middle of may, we're going to see construction slow down. the democratic budget alternative we have a plan. the president put forward a six-year man. $478 billion. it's included in his budget numbers. it's not like ok, little ast risk, we're figure this out in a month and a half. the president makes sure we don't have a shortfall and he said, we need a modernized infrastructure so we can compete in this global economy system of mr. speaker, it's just -- it really is reckless to put forward a budget where it doesn't provepbvide any solution to something that's going to face us in a month and a half. now i'm really pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman

from new jersey, a terrific member of the budget committee, mr. pascrell. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. pascrell: thank you, mr. ranking member, thank you mr. chairman thank you, mr. speaker. there is a stark choice to be made. there is no question about it, as i'm quoting from the gentleman from california. mr. chairman, this is the stark choice. look at this. this is what you tried to do to the american people after bill clinton left office. during his term, 21 million jobs were created. the next eight years, when we dropped the tax rate down from 39.6% to 35% for those most affluent, we didn't gain anything. in fact, we lost 463,000 jobs. you want to try this again? we're not going to try it again.

toucht talk about dead on arrival, those are your words. this is dead on arrival. i rise in strong opposition to this budget. forget about the trillions of dollars worth of cuts to programs that help people with low or moderate incomes. forget about the tax increases that hit the middle class working poor, so that some millionaires and billionaires can squeeze a little more from the stone. forget about repealing obamacare for the 56th time. taking affordable health care out of the hands of 16 million americans, leaving them with nothing and not having the guts to tell them what's going on. forget about all of that the fundamental problem with this document is that even with all the draconian spending cuts, and with all the tax increases, i just described, at the end of the day, it still doesn't

balance as the ranking member just a few moments ago said over and over again. in fact, mr. ranking man, it's not even close. this budget, while calling for the complete and total repeal of the affordable health care act continues to assume that the law's $2 million revenue increases in medicare savings, it assumes that, will do away with the -- we'll do away with the bill but keep the money. i don't know any other way to put it. when we get to taxes, the budget assumes the revenues remain unchanged for the current law yet you, yourself, mr. chairman, i have a great deal of respect for you doctor, you stated explicitly through the chair that you weren't -- you don't think we should be using the current law baseline. .

you all voted for that. they weren't assumed in the current baseline. we have passed $100 billion. where is this money coming from? we are the tax and spend democrats. you folks know better than that. $200 billion. $200 billion has been reported out of ways means and another $300 billion tax cuts for paris hilton and others who are left a nice inheritance. that's what you are going to do tomorrow. my friend, the chairman, might be assuming that your majority will pass a $1 trillion tax increase to offset these tax breaks and abide by the budget revenue assumptions. mr. speaker i urge a no vote

for this budget. it's simply not worth the paper it's printed on. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: i want to make a comment about the highway trust fund that was referenced and my friend from maryland said there is nothing that will be in this budget. this deals with physician cat year 2016. the good news is that last year's 2015 budget, we also had a proposal to provide for a deficit neutral reserve fund which was used for map 21. a path of how we are able to actually solve the challenges before us. i am so pleased to yield three

minutes to the gentlelady from california mrs. walters. mrs. walters: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the house republican fiscal year 2016 budget resolution a balanced budget for a stronger america. at a time when our nation is grappling with over $18 trillion in national debt and uncertain economic future, now more than ever washington must learn to live within its means. washington's spending problem is one that cannot be taken lightly. according to the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen, the single biggest threat to our national security is our national debt. house republicans are working to confront this issue head on. in our budget proposal we seek

to tackle washington's spending addiction by reducing federal spending by $5.5 trillion and balancing the federal budget in less than 10 years. this is a sharp contrast to president obama's budget, which never balances ever. despite the president's continued insistence on raising taxes. our budget aims to strengthen vital programs like medicare and social security in a fiscally responsible way, so we can fulfill the promises we've made to our nation's seniors. one of the federal government's top priorities is providing a strong national defense. this budget boosts defense spending above the president's levels so we can ensure a strong safe and secure nation. furthermore, our proposal

repeals obamacare in full, including the laws, taxes regulations and mandates that are crippling hard-working americans and small businesses nationwide. we also empower patients by repealing the president's independent payment advisory board, an unelected, unaccountable board of bureaucrats charged with making patients health care decisions. the republican budget is a positive step forward for our nation. it seeks to address our nation's debt crisis while also supporting the programs that are critical to our national and economic security. i urge my colleagues to support this budget resolution. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr.

speaker. as we previously pointed out this republican budget keeps the receive news from the affordable care act even as it claims to repeal the affordable care act and without that level of revenue along with other savings, it doesn't even come close to balancing. no accountant would certify this republican budget close to balance. i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from new mexico, terrific member of the committee, someone who is an expert on all sorts of issues, including health care. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. lujan grisham: i thank the ranking member. this budget, the republican budget is a collection of $5.5 trillion of devastating cuts of both mandatory and nondefense discretionary programs. i heard my colleagues say that we need to treat the budget like we do american families when

you can't live within your means, you have to figure that out. this is a budget that takes away those means. we are going to talk about entitlement reform yet to provide an investment and actually providing jobs and providing opportunities to have careers and meaningful wages. now, as we debate these numbers, i really hope that my republican colleagues when they vote for this budget, will you really know what you are doing and what these numbers mean for hard-working american families? because i know what the budget does and how it impacts them. here's what it means. it means 290 fewer new mexico children will have head start. fewer residents will receive job training and employment services. 59,000 students will lose pell grants. 24100 seniors will likely have

to pay more for their prescription drugs and about 431,000, bears repeating, 431,000 receiving snap, half of which are children, will be in develop ardy of losing their nutrition support. when we think about the budget we just cannot think about the numbers that sit on a piece of paper. we need to think about the human meaning behind the numbers. we need to think about the child who will go hungry, the student who can't afford college and the senior who won't be able to pay their medical bills. we need to invest in economic security for everyone. i urge my colleagues to oppose this budget and instead pass a budget that lifts people out of poverty, invests in hard-working families, who have been left behind by the economy and provides for shared prosperity. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. price: i yield three minutes

to the senior member of the budget committee, the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: mr. speaker back on january 20, 2009 the day president obama took office, the federal debt and as we stand here today, that's an increase of over 70%. debt now represents 101% of the g.d.p. let's put this in context, americans owe more money than the value of all the goods and services that are produced right here in the united states in one year. that level of debt quite honestly is unsustainable. is nt just me saying that. c.b.o. says our high and rising debt would have serious negative consequences on the economy and the federal budget.

admiral mike mullen said, the single biggest threat to our national security is the debt. america is faced with two paths. one to continue down the path of blissful neglect or on the other path to seek an honest solution to it. instead of solving our debt problems, president obama has committed to exacerbating them. the president's budget would add $8.5 trillion to our already staggering debt. but despite new taxes in addition the obama's budget never ever balances. it is a vision that confines our children and grandchildren to heavy debt and tax burdens. the republican budget is a stark alternative. instead of ever increasing debt

and ever higher taxes, republicans will balance the budget in less than 10 years without raising more taxes on you. instead of pretending that medicare is sound, republicans will strengthen the program by making much needed structural improvements to it. instead of dictating that washington knows all the answers, republicans will promote by innovation and also by flexibility for medicaid, for education and other programs by restoring local control. mr. speaker, i urge today all members of this body to stand up to support the budget and to support the american taxpayers. to stand up for strengthening our social safety nets and to stand up for our children and grandchildren who did not deserve to be handed a bill for irresponsible spending today. i urge a yes vote. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland is recognized.

mr. van hollen: thank you l speaker. i don't think that huge disinvestment in education starting with early education going through k through 12 helps our kids and their future. i don't think that the efforts that strip away at a lot of the job training programs help hard-working americans. the president's budget priority is to accelerate economic growth and have more broadly shared prosperity. i would remind my colleagues, the day the president was sworn into office, we were losing 800,000 jobs every month in this country. the bottom was falling out. now we've seen over the last 60 months, 12 million jobs created. we have a long way to go, but we are certainly on the right track. and the president's budget provides for additional economic growth in a fiscally responsible

way. the president's budget reduces the debt-to-g.d.p. ratio. the president's budget does not do is disinvest in our kids' education. it does not increase the costs to seniors or prescription drugs and co-pays for preventive health care and it doesn't get it doesn't get away with release for middle-class americans. now, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from california who knows a lot about the importance of economic growth. the chair: the gentlelady from california is recognized.