Long-Term SCORE Act

I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my friend from Pennsylvania states that all we look at are spending cuts alone, that that's the way we believe the budget ought to be balanced. Certainly not. In fact, we believe strongly that pro-growth policies will actually assist in getting us to balance much, much sooner.

The CBO yesterday, in fact, said that currently the revenues within a 10-year period of time are going to double; in fact, the revenues this year, this fiscal year, will reach the 10-year average, and the revenues in the next fiscal year will be the highest level of revenues ever recorded in the history of this Nation. Mr. Speaker, we have a spending debt crisis, not a revenue debt crisis.

My colleague says that we reject a balanced approach. On the contrary. In fact, all you've got to do is read our budget. There's a balanced approach. It brings about appropriate spending reductions, appropriate closure of loopholes in credits and reductions of the Tax Code to gain revenue in pro-growth policy so that we can balance the budget.

My friends on the other side of the aisle talk about needing to vote on the sequester right way, to change the sequester right away. In fact, that's exactly what House Republicans have done two times, Mr. Speaker, in the last year, once in May, once in December. In fact, the recent bill we adopted reprioritized the spending reductions included in the sequester so that there was a calculated way to reduce spending that did not have across-the-board spending reductions. Our friends on the other side oppose that.

Mr. Speaker, the President's sequester, the item that he put in place, we have proposed positive solutions for on two occasions and passed through this House. The Senate has refused to act on those.

The President yesterday proposed a plan in a speech, not specific legislation, that, in fact, we've talked about through our proposals that we passed through this House on two occasions, in May and December of last year.

Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill is pretty doggone simple. It only asks the President to do what families do and businesses do all across this Nation every single year, and that is to make certain that we don't spend more money than we take in.

House Republicans on two occasions over the past 2 years have passed a budget that gets us on a path to balance. We will do it again. Two weeks ago we passed a bill out of this House to make certain that we held the Senate to account, to require them to do a budget, something they haven't done in the last 4 years.

The bill before us today simply says to the President, Mr. President, when you bring your budget to Congress, just let us know when it comes to balance, that's all. And, oh, by the way, the past four budgets that the President has proposed have not ever come to balance.

Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that the House and the Senate and the President work together to get a balanced budget to spend responsibly so we can reinvigorate this economy and create jobs.

Turn down this motion to recommit. I urge my colleagues to accept the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am opposed.

I rise in opposition to this bill and to offer the final amendment that will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill, as amended, will immediately proceed to final passage.

This amendment rejects the rigid partisan view presented in this legislation that deficit reduction must be achieved by spending cuts alone, regardless of the consequences. Moving from one crisis to another and failing to meet our responsibilities, as Republicans have done time and time again, has hurt our economic growth. Most recently, in December, our economy contracted for the first time in 3 years as a result of delayed action by Republican leadership in the House.

This amendment makes clear that there's a better way. It recognizes that our Nation faces serious fiscal challenges. We agree, as the President does, that these fiscal challenges must be addressed. We believe that we must reduce the deficit over time and we must work to stabilize the debt. But we must do so in a way that does not hurt our economic recovery, that enables us to meet our obligations to our seniors and to our children and to our future, and ensures our economic competitiveness and economic growth.

Every bipartisan commission has said that the only way we can meet these goals--to reduce the deficit, to meet our obligations, and to make investments necessary for economic growth--is to do so in a balanced way with a combination of spending cuts and new revenues. And the American people agree. American consumers and American businesses agree. Economists and investors, workers and managers, older Americans and young adults all agree. We need a balanced approach. We need to find that common ground and we need to make decisions now that provide certainty and stability for our families, for our businesses, and for our Nation. Yet the Republicans reject this balanced approach. They prefer to place blame and to seek to deflect attention from the realities before us.

The automatic across-the-board cuts of $85 billion will go into effect in just 22 days. Rather than work with us and to work with the President to find a better way to avoid the sequester with a mix of cuts and revenue, they suggest a new budget process that may not be constitutional and surely will not be productive.

The bill before us is simply a political message. We should reject that narrow message. Instead, we should make clear that we are willing to find that balanced approach that enables us to put our great Nation on sound financial footing by providing certainty during economic recovery, reducing the deficit over time, sustaining Medicare for seniors now and into the future, protecting Social Security, and by creating opportunity for middle class Americans and investing in education, research, science, innovation, and infrastructure to ensure our economic competitiveness. Because if we do, we will not only reduce the deficit, we will expand opportunity and prosperity for all Americans.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 35, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Schrader

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 36 I was detained in a meeting. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''