mr. chairman, mr. van hollen, i think you have to -- >> would you turn on your mic, please. >> oh, mr. chairman. many van hollen -- >> i don't think your mic is on you. >> there, i'm sorry. mr. chairman, mr. van hollen you have to give us a minute to reconnoiter about what the best answer is. i think the best way to describe as a starting answer then i'll turn to jim and jim for further detail s details remember, the budget resolution is a budget blueprint designed to provide a vision of where we believe the fiscal policy of the federal budget needs to go over the next ten years. it is not designed to provide every single solitary assumption behind the numbers and the budget committee has a tradition which started with previous chairman and have continued with this chairman is that we give examples of both mandatory or direct spending as well as discretionary site of how we achieve our numbers. this is based upon policies as the chairman eluded to earlier in his remarks. this is not a mathematical exercise, this is a policy-based effort. we are not required to provide every single solitary assump

mr. chairman, mr. van hollen, we started off with the cbo baseline because we thought that was a reasonable place to start. the feedback does not assume any changes regarding tax reform assumptions we are making in this document. we would argue that if we did provide the feedback -- if we did provide, the feedback would be even higher. cbo does not give that to us because we are not presenting a full, detailed plan. so therefore, there is no tax provision, tax benefit or feedback. this is simply the feedback you see, simply from lowering the deficit, lowering pressure on interest rates, creating growth because of the substitution, if you will, of borrowing less money in the government. >> i understand. bottom line is, other than what you just described with respect to the cbo, there is no other assumption, impact from so-called dynamic scoring on tax policy? >> there is no assumptions at all. no assumptions on tax policy other than the cbo baseline. >> i will ask some transportation questions. we all have some mo

mr. astor -- --ms. castor -- aye. ms. lujan grisham -- aye. mr. lieu -- aye. mr. norcross -- aye. mr. rokida -- no. mr. garrett? mr. cole -- no. mr. woodall -- no. mr. mooney -- no. mr. van hollen -- aye. mr. chairman -- no. rep. price: at all members voted? does any member wish to change their vote? clerk: the ayes are 14 and the no's are 21. amendment number 26 is relating to long-term care services. >> thank you mr. chairman. we have considered a lot of contentious issues today but this is one that i hope we can all agree on. long-term care is a concern that affects all americans and i know all of us have loved ones that have or will seek the possibility of long-term care and support. as our nation continues to age the demand for long-term care is expected to double in the next 30 years. the fact is, existing programs at huge gaps in access. in the u.s., the costs of long-term care are covered by a patchwork of insurance, public programs, and family caregivers. the systems are not integrated, difficult to navigate, and are designed for the 20th century. we spend a lot of time talking about medicare and medicaid, but the reality is that neither one is designed to help seniors deal with long-term

mr. van hollen. mr. van hollen: thank you, chairman price. as we gather here today we face some good news some bad news, and some very bad news. the good news is that the economy is improving an more americans are working. the private sector has now 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. it has become a chronic problem that dates back to the 1970's. as this chart shows, there has been a growing gap between the increased value workers are creating in the economy, which is that blue line, and the paychecks that they are taking home. worker productivity, steadily climbing. paychecks, flat lined. so where are the gains from that hard work going? well, income gains from increased worker productivity have gone overwhelmingly to those at the very top of the income scale as this next chart shows. th

mr. con ellie. mr. connolly: i thank mr. van hollen. thank you soich for your leadership. mr. chairman, this year's republican budget resolution is titled a balanced budget for a stronger america. but by every measure the draconian cuts proposed in this budget would severely weaken america's innovative advantage and competitiveness. it might as be called dis investments in america. research, once a bedrock of federal priority that spurred new discoveries that are now vital in our daily lives and the economy. it is critical in my district where the technology community is driving innovation. but this republican budget would slash r&d funding by 15% to its lowest level since 2002. that is a retreat from america's role as the global innovation leader and essentially cedes the playing field to our international competition. the republican budget would disinvest in our classrooms. to achieve their ruse of balancing the budget they would cut nondefense spending 24% below the sequester level. for k through 12 education, that translates into $89 billion over the next decade and would surely le

mr. con ellie. mr. connolly: i thank mr. van hollen. thank you soich for your leadership. mr. chairman, this year's republican budget resolution is titled a balanced budget for a stronger america. but by every measure the draconian cuts proposed in this budget would severely weaken america's innovative advantage and competitiveness. it might as be called dis investments in america. research, once a bedrock of federal priority that spurred new discoveries that are now vital in our daily lives and the economy. it is critical in my district where the technology community is driving innovation. but this republican budget would slash r&d funding by 15% to its lowest level since 2002. that is a retreat from america's role as the global innovation leader and essentially cedes the playing field to our international competition. the republican budget would disinvest in our classrooms. to achieve their ruse of balancing the budget they would cut nondefense spending 24% below the sequester level. for k through 12 education, that translates into $89 billion over the next decade and would surely le

mr. van hollen relating to >> amendment number 17 offered by mr. van hollen relating to social security. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment is straightforward. the budget resolution presented by our republican colleagues has some language to establish a process that could fast-track social security proposals that could privatize social security cuts, social security benefits. what this legislation does is recognize that social security is a program that benefits more than 59 million americans currently, that as more americans do not have access to benefit plans, social security benefits become even more important than they were before. it says very simply that we should not be cutting social security benefits. i yield a time to my colleague from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i support the amendment and i am disappointed that this budget resolution seeks to manufacture a crisis in the social security disability trust fund by prohibiting transfers. social security is critical lifeline for the elderly and the disabled. they are not an entitlement. you pay in over your lifetime. they are not in crisi

mr. price: mr. chairman, i'm prepared to close. if the gentleman from maryland desires to close that would be fine. the chair: is the gentleman from maryland prepared to close? mr. van hollen: i am. is the chairman prepared to close? the chair: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. you have two minutes remaining. mr. van hollen: two minutes remaining. as leader pelosi just said, this really comes down to what vision you have for what has helped power our economy. the republican theory of the cases that our economy is the power of providing tax rates cuts it the very high end of the income scale and somehow the benefits of that will trickle down and lift everybody up. the problem with that theory is it already crashed in the real world. right, in the early 2000's, that's what president bush did. income for folks at the top went up and everybody else was run into the ground, running in place or running behind. that's why we presented a budget based on an economy that accelerates because more americans are able to make bigger paychecks through harder work. and why we proposed to change the tax code from one that is currently skewed and tilted in favor of unearned income

mr. buchanan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the opportunity. i also want to thank and look forward to working with ranking member van hollen as well as all the members here on the committee. everybody has a different reason why they run for congress. for me personally i was concerned eight years ago about the debt and deficit. i came in '07. we were 8 trillion in change, today we're at $18 trillion. you look at 49 out of 50 governors, they have to balance the budget. look at florida after '08, we had less revenues, the next couple years they made the tough choices and made a difference and today we're more prosperous than ever in terms of what's going on in florida. it's not about when you look back historically about democrats that have been the problem or republicans, it's been both. over 50 years we've balanced the budget four or five times. i grew up in the city in detroit and it was a great city, we were the fourth-largest city in the country, it went bankrupt. when you look at the cost of our debt today at $18 trillion, normally the cost of money is not 1%, it's 4% to 5%. 5% on soon to be $20 trillion is a trillion dollars a year. you look at overall how many dollars we take in terms of taxes and revenue $3, trillion, it could be as high as a third of the overall debt. that's why i believe in a constitutional balanced budget amendment that we can work towards. i think this is a good start. it's not perfect as some other members have mentioned but i think if we don't do it at some point, i don't know when that it, is it ends badly. that's why i want to do everything i can to move forward in terms of a balanced budget in the future. thank you. i yield back. >> i appreciate the gentleman's comment's. pleased to yield to the gentleman from arkansas mr. womack. >> i thank the chairman. i have great respect for our chairman and ranking member van hollen for your leadership on this particular committee. it's a great honor to serve here. this is arguably the most fundamental of our legislative duties. and i'm mindful of the fact that there are as many opinions on the priorities of federal spending in the united states of america as there are members seated around this dais. indeed, the total membership of the house. nonetheless, it's our duty to coalesce around the budget that meets the demands of the world's greatest nation. the end result of our work should at a minimum keep our nation safe. it should address the long-term drivers of the deficits and debt that have been mentioned so often in this discussion and contribute to a climate that creates jobs and opportunities for all americans. it is my opinion that the two things most important for our country that this congress can do right now is to balance its budget and to bring regul

mr. mikita, no. mr. garrett, no. mr. cole. no. -- mr. westerman no. mr. van hollen, aye. mr. yarmuth, aye. ms. moore aye. ms. caster, -- dingell, aye. mr. lew aye. moulton, aye. chairman no. classes any member wish to change the vote? >> mr. chairman, on that vote, the eyes are 14 and the nose are 22. >> the nose have it any amendment is not agreed to. the next amendment is the first one out of numerical order amendment number 11 county clerk will designate designated amendment and the staff will contribute. >> amendment number 11 relating to visit -- veterans programs. >> recognized for six minutes. . the president's's requested level by 1.9 billion dollars for fiscal year 15. in short, such ensure the services provided would never be at risk in a government shutdown para protecting our veterans is not an option, but a duty. we oh it to service members to provide them with education and job training and long-term treatment. they have earned this in service to our nation. veterans continually suffer from high and employment and suicide and homelessness. we can do better. that begins by relieving the sequester for the budget, which puts many programs at risk. i see fir

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.

mr. blinken: thank you mr. chairman. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> coming up, chris van hollen. after that the budget committee markup. on the next washington journal john hills and wrath discusses the federal reserve and what could happen if interest rates rise. and the current proposals for the secret service. plus, we will be taking your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets. former maryland governor martin o'malley will be speaking tonight at the scott county iowa democratic party. we bring you live coverage from the event in davenport. on c-span two book tv's on afterwards, pulitzer prize-winning historian eric on the efforts of free black and white abolitionists to help fugitive slaves. sunday night at 10:00, abu dhabi-based journalist on the rise and leadership of isis drew the middle east. saturday morning, starting at 9:00 est and throughout the day american history tv joins historians and authors at the abraham lincoln symposium. sunday evening, a visit to the national museum of health and medicine. to view items from the civil war collection related to president