H.Res. 85

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, first, because I don't get the chance to do this very often, this is the Joint Economic Committee. We are basically here to talk about the economic impact of this piece of legislation. I am joyful to have Mr. Beyer as my opposite. He is someone who I truly respect intellectually. If he suggests you read a book, grab it.

But this is one of those occasions where, having sat through the Committee on the Budget's testimony discussion, I am both frustrated and a little heartbroken on the number of things that were said that actually weren't mathematically true or policy true or accurate. I am hoping that those of us on the Joint Economic Committee can actually raise the level of this argument and this discourse to being hyperfactual because we need to get this right.

Do understand that a $1.9 trillion bill, if you do the interest, is $2.4 trillion to $2.5 trillion. So we need to start getting our understanding of the types of dollars we are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, I don't intend to stand here and just do a bunch of responses, but here's the quarterly from the Census Bureau about State and local revenues and resources: A 17.7 percent increase in receipts.

Now, your State might not be that, but 17.7 percent from the Census Bureau, their latest document.

And if you have one of the municipalities that is hurting, that has a shortfall, there is still $58 billion sitting in the account that hasn't been spent, yet we are talking about adding another $1.9 trillion in spending.

Until we also take a moment and understand the almost $1 trillion still sitting in the accounts that haven't been released or spent, part of this argument we are having today is absolutely absurd.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, just a couple points. There is still $280 billion sitting in the payroll protection account. There is still $239 billion sitting in the health spending account. I am someone who, on a personal level--and I believe our Republican side of the Joint Economic Committee--believes we need to probably spend more, but it needs to be properly targeted so we get the impact.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that Congresswoman Beatty has a great mask. It is wonderfully sparkly.

I did want to share one thing very, very quickly. This is our CBO projection of where we are at right now. With the moneys that have already been authorized right now, by the end of this year, we will be close to a 4 percent GDP growth. So last quarter wasn't anywhere where we wanted it. The quarter before that was miserable. But you have to understand that this is where we are at.

We keep hearing our fellow Members make comments, saying the economists said, ``Go big.'' But if you actually listen to their second line, multiple economists said, ``Go big, but go targeted.''

This document isn't targeted. It is all over the board.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Estes).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Once again--and I am probably going to keep making this point over, and over, and over--I care deeply and am desperately concerned particularly for the poor and the working poor in this country. And this document, if we are going to be honest about it, does not target their suffering.

I will show a couple of boards here where, once again, we are going to be sending stunning amounts of money to places that it is just going to sit in a bank account. It is going to go to places where it is not actually creating that velocity, that multiplier effect of helping those who are suffering.

And do understand--this is important--there is still $172 billion sitting in the disaster loan accounts. There is another $172 billion still sitting in the unemployment insurance accounts from things we have already done together.

In that case, it is not completely--I don't want to use the word ``disingenuous''--but some of the things we are saying here that, yes, there is a crisis out there, and, yes, there is actually money sitting in the accounts. Get that damn money out of those accounts to where the suffering is.

And with that I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, maybe I am going to break protocol, but I am finding that this will be the second time I think I have complimented someone on the Democratic side. Triggers make a lot of sense in this type of mechanism when you have, functionally, $1 trillion still sitting in the accounts, and we are seeing projections from CBO saying, functionally, by the fourth quarter--I am sorry, I didn't have a chance to print this large--but by the fourth quarter, unemployment--look, I am one of those who believes full employment is always the ultimate goal--but unemployment will be back to where basically we were in 2015-2016.

Can we do better? Absolutely. But to do better, it is going to require thoughtful, targeted, well-designed spending, of our resources, our statutes. And one of the reasons I talk about that is there is something very unique going on. And I hope our chairman of the Joint Economic Committee will actually think about this because we haven't figured out how to turn this one into being partisan yet. I am sure we will figure it out.

But right now, this is the sort of thing we should be talking about. There is this crazy renaissance going on in this country of people starting new businesses, filing new LLCs, starting new concerns.

Now, it may be because of the tragedy of the business they have right now which has been crushed by the shutdowns and the virus, but there are a remarkable number of new concerns beginning.

Wouldn't it be both elegant, but also very powerful, as we watch unemployment, to find ways to access capital; access to streamlined permitting, licensing; crazy things like allowing someone to do a microbusiness out of public housing, things that actually have impact.

And it turns out, those aren't the sort of things you find in a $1.9 trillion--functionally $2.5 trillion if you are going to be honest about the real cost--spending package. And I understand this is a piece of legislation that if you actually look at it, it is just line, after line, after line, after line of numbers.

If this passes--which it probably will, you know, the Democrats are in the majority--the ethical, moral obligations we have heard from multiple speakers here that a budget is your values, is the value the fact you can spend stunning amounts of money even when there is $1 trillion still sitting in the bank unspent, or is the value that you are going to do it in a way where we impact the working poor; where we impact those who are truly suffering, and not crushing someone like my 5-year-old daughter who is the one who is ultimately going to be paying this back.

So if we are going to make the moral argument, I hope we think about the whole, shall we say, continuum of what we do here, what is moral, what is right.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in many ways we are all saying the same thing. It is just, once again, trying to make the argument, if we do this smartly and well-targeted, we can do it for a dramatically more efficient cost and actually help more of the poor that we know are suffering, more of the people who have been crushed, more of the small businesses.

And a simple example, Opportunity Insights has predicted that, with a $2,000 check to functionally every household that makes less than $46,000, only $420, functionally, of what they receive will get spent. The rest goes in the bank. Maybe that is a good thing. Maybe that is the audience you want to target. But when you start doing the same thing to populations, and for some reason they use $78,000, only $105 gets spent. So think of that.

Mr. Speaker, increase the check another $1,400, a population that makes $78,000 or more, they are only spending $105. The rest is going in the bank account. Maybe that is wonderful, but that is not what we are debating. We are trying to create a multiplier effect of some stimulus in our society to get the economy going so we see those GDP numbers go up; the unemployment go down; and we get back to the miracle we were at in 2018 and 2019, where income and equality actually shrank for the first time in 2 years, where food insecurity shrank for the first time in decades and decades and decades, where the working poor actually were doing better than they had in decades and decades and decades.

How do we get back to, functionally, what was the miracle of 2018 and 2019?

And my argument is, the model that we are reading in this resolution, isn't it. It doesn't get you there. If we truly have the same goal, I desperately hope our friends on the left and those of us on the right, who actually want to look at this almost like an economist of a laser beam, are saying: Let's find those who are hurting and find out how to get the resources that are already appropriated and get those to them, and then appropriate more where necessary.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, once again, back to facts over feelings: After the tax reform, what did we see in our society?

It was the first 2 years that we actually saw income and equality shrink in modern economic times. I thought that was the Holy Grail.

Did you see what happened to Hispanics, African Americans' incomes, working poor incomes?

The fact of the matter is, if you tell the truth about the post-tax reform model--just maybe because I was in the room--the top 10 percent actually were paying more of the Federal income taxes than prior. Yet that somehow isn't the folklore that we so often hear from this floor.

Mr. Speaker, there are couple other points I would like to make. And a couple of this is important because Chairman Beyer actually did a terrific job touching on some of this. And he was making a very powerful point. And, actually, I hate to say this, he was reading part of my script, which actually is a little creepy.

The total deposits in commercial banks, if you take a look at this line, have gone up dramatically. It is because too much of the money that we have done bipartisan in the last year to help stimulate and save the economy ended up in pockets of those very, very wealthy, or even medium wealthy, and it ended up sitting in the bank and not circulating, rotating in the economy and helping the workers, helping the working poor, helping those who are just trying to survive.

My fear is this budget reconciliation document is going to be just a lot more of this, if you actually look. The other thing is--this is a tough one, and this is one I am hoping that the placeholder in this document isn't what the Democrats really are heading towards because, if it is, you are going to hear those who are on our side scream that this is a payoff to, shall we say, a constituency that is very supportive of the Democrats.

Mr. Speaker, not been a great year--the year 2000, about 350,000 State municipal workers lost their jobs. This budget reconciliation bill has about $350 billion in the line item for that population. You do realize that's $1 million a job. And if you do the total number, it is still $350,000 a job.

Is that compassion? Or is that lunacy?

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I will tell you this: Mr. Green also can sing, and he is one of those I consider a friend. He and I have done a number of pieces of legislation, and he and I have a running discussion of what actually helps the working poor. We have different views, but we know we both have a passion of it.

Mr. Speaker, let's actually take sort of the theme that has been offered here. I believe it is absolutely mathematically wrong, but an argument that, Hey, so much of this has helped the wealthy in tax reform and those things. Great.

Mr. Speaker, if someone on the Democratic side can promise me that when I am looking at this budget resolution, this is not creating a policy box for the Committee on Ways and Means

to turn around and re-implement policy where, functionally, the benefit goes mostly to the very, very wealthy.

So when I see the box here that looks like it would allow for certain revenues to be raised, and then it goes to possibly a SALT--a State and local tax deduction, which we all know the top 1 percent gets 57 percent of the value of it, the bottom 80 percent of our society only gets 4 percent of the value--that would be, actually, a tax break. Actually, I think I have been quoted as saying, ``It is the most regressive tax break that you can think of in our society right now that is in play.''

I am just desperately hoping that isn't what I am reading in some of these pages as part of that setup. And I would love someone on the left to basically promise me that we are not seeing a setup here to, once again, subsidize the rich.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the comment of ``look at this budget and see a party's values,'' this may be a little ethereal, but have you all heard the term ``blank check company''? It is one of the rages on Wall Street right now. Take basically a shell, have a bunch of money put into it, and then they promise, saying, we are going to find something to spend the money on.

This is essentially a blank check budget reconciliation with actually none of the very elegant and persuasive words said.

There is also one other thing, and I want to say this as respectfully as possible, so I am going to read someone else's words. The well-worn and misleading talking points is 83 percent of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest 1 percent. Just not true. Since the day of tax reform until 2025, the wealthiest, and maybe it is too much, get 25 percent. At the very end of tax reform, when many of the different tax breaks and those things are expiring out, there is an anomaly in the year 2027. It is not 83 percent.

Please, I beg of my friends on the left, I know we like our talking points, but there is a reason the public is so enraged with us. It is because we have this bad habit of getting behind these microphones and playing some real games with the facts, and the facts are the facts.

Once again, the blank check company concept, this is now the blank check budget.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, there is one other thing I wanted to share. First, the Restaurants Act is a good piece of legislation. I think there are many of us on Ways and Means who look forward to it or something very, very close to it.

Also, one other comment, Madam Speaker spoke earlier, I was actually somewhat enthused about her focus on kids in school. As Mr. Beyer teased me, I am 58, my wife is 58, and I have a 5 year old. That is the ultimate definition of being optimistic for the future. That is funny.

But the fact of the matter is, I desperately hope that Madam Speaker will use her influence on the teachers' union to encourage getting these kids back to school. I have some charts--but I am not going to show them to everyone because I may save them for evening floor time-- on the devastation--and the Speaker actually just spoke about this, which is a great irony--of what we are doing to the future earning power of everyone from the parents to the children themselves.

How many saw the story, I think in The New York Times, this last week about children suicides in Nevada?

It rips your heart out. But I don't see it in this budget document. It is not in there.

If that is where we are heading, great. As Republicans we are going to help make good things happen, getting these schools open, but we actually need the influence from the left, particularly with the teachers' union to make that a possibility.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this has been actually a reasonable conversation. I desperately hope we are going to have more of this.

But back to some of the principal points from the Republican side we are trying to share about this budget resolution is the SBA paycheck protection. There is still $280 billion sitting in the account that hasn't gone out the door; healthcare spending, still has $239 billion sitting in the account that hasn't gone out the door; economic injury disaster loans, $172 billion still sitting in the account that hasn't gone out the door; unemployment insurance expansion, another $172 billion still sitting in the account; education funding, $59 billion sitting in the account; assistance to State and local, $58 billion; stimulus checks, there is still $52 billion sitting in there; food stamps, there is still $33 billion; childcare and development block grants, there is $10 billion sitting in that account; agriculture assistance, there is still $29 billion sitting in the account. That is $1 trillion.

Is there a need for more help in our society?

Absolutely.

Does this document actually target it to those who are hurting, to the working poor, and to those who actually haven't gained great wealth with the stock market? Are other dollars in their accounts?

I just don't see it in there.

And functionally, this is $2.5 trillion of spending. When we authorize $1.9 trillion and then do the interest on it, I think that is a fair interest calculation.

I beg of us that as this moves forward and we actually get to put some policy behind these incredibly broad numbers, will those of us who actually care about math--because the running joke in our family is that Daddy works in a math-free zone. Somehow, I thought it would get a laugh.

I desperately ask all of us, this is a stunning amount of money. I understand the need for the administration and the Democrat majority to act like individuals of action.

But what happens when that action is theater?

On the conservative side we want to help, but $1.9 trillion isn't the help. It is figuring out where the needs are and getting it to them. Instead--and I'll show some of the charts--some of the dollar amounts that are in this document are absurd and still don't get us what we know we need in our society.

So as part of my closing here, we have $1 trillion already still sitting in the accounts that haven't gone out the door.

What are we doing to get those resources to those who need it?

Because this is something that we could do instantly. The cash is already sitting there. It is already authorized.

But also, what could we do as those of us in the Joint Economic Committee try to work on math saying: Here is how we get the maximum amount of stimulus to help those who are hurting?

How do we get back to--forgive my cheat sheet--how do we get back to an environment where, once again, like we had in 2018 and 2019, income inequality actually shrank for the first time?

How do we get back to where food insecurity was shrinking and where the working poor were getting substantially less poor?

I know there is a great difficulty for my brothers and sisters on the left to extend tax reform and regulatory reform any credit. Then don't give it credit. But do at least accept we had some amazing things happening there for a couple of years for the very populations we come behind these microphones and say that we care about.

Is there a way that on this left budget document--which is functionally a blank check company--being authorized to drop $1.9 trillion in immediate cash with an ultimate cost of about $2.5 trillion, could we actually take a look at what was working in our society before the pandemic and figure out how to do more of what was working and take a look at what was done in the previous years where we spent lots of money and we had almost no multiplier effect, none of the folks we were trying to help were getting help, and do less of this?

Because this document reads very much like we are going back to the bad old days of spend lots of money, do some great virtue signaling, and, ultimately, the very people we talk about are no better off.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the so-called budget before us ``squanders the opportunity to start this new Congress working together to address the concerns and priorities of the American people in a constructive and bipartisan manner.''

Mr. Speaker, those are not my words. That is what was said at this very same moment in 2017 by my colleague across the aisle who is now chairman of this committee. You see, he found the very same process they are starting today to be so objectionable, so one-sided, so partisan, such an abuse of power, that he spoke in opposition for an hour to the very same thing the House Democrats are doing now.

The truth is, I look forward to the time my colleague on the other side and I can actually formalize our committee, welcome our members, organize, and develop an oversight plan for the new administration, but that has yet to happen.

But here we are on the floor with a bill already; a so-called budget resolution; a resolution which, in reality, isn't any sort of budget. It is simply a mechanism for the Democrat leaders to enact a radical agenda rejected by Americans this fall. They know it. It was rejected because their caucus is much smaller now today than it was before the election.

So why are they doing this?

While five different COVID stimulus packages were negotiated and ultimately signed into law on a bipartisan basis over the last year, they apparently now need a more one-sided approach, one which is much more partisan and bends the rules to radicalize this Congress and the policies it produces. Quite the opposite of the speech we all heard from out in front of this building 2 weeks ago today.

The power of our example, isn't that what we were told?

Well, what is the example here?

That the unification, the bipartisanship, and work-together attitude that the President called for were just empty words for the House majority. Though I suppose with this partisan process, our House Democrat colleagues are, in a sense, following the example of President Biden from his first days in office.

President Biden has spent his first few days signing one executive order after another and pushing policies that will destroy American jobs, make our country less secure, and raise the cost of living for American families. I will just name a few:

Canceling the Keystone XL pipeline directly eliminates an estimated 11,000 jobs, including 8,000 union jobs.

Enacting a 60-day moratorium on new mining, oil and gas leasing, and permitting on Federal lands will cause severe damage to America's economy and energy independence, and will result in the loss of over 100,000 jobs.

Mr. Speaker, 100,000 Americans are fired by the stroke of a pen.

Returning the U.S. to the failed Paris Agreement of 2015 will reduce U.S. competitiveness in manufacturing and next-generation technologies, as industries move to China.

Terminating a national emergency declaration which immediately stops all wall construction at the Southern border leaves American taxpayers with an incomplete government project and the loss of thousands of jobs.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of Americans are, once again, fired, again, by the stroke of the President's pen. That is a powerful example by the President of how to make life harder for the working class and to weaken America.

Again, I come back to: Why is this happening today?

I think the American people deserve to know, and the answer is simple: Democrats in Washington are setting up a partisan process to have the Vice President cast the decisive vote in the Senate on an array of radical policies.

At worst, their plans are to try and use this pandemic to seize more government control of your life; to grow government power over your healthcare choices; to place new rules, mandates, and regulations on your small businesses; and to grant citizenship to millions here illegally.

At best, their plan is to actually award hundreds of billions of dollars to the very same State governments which are shutting down our schools, telling restaurants they can't open, and keeping families locked inside. They want to bail out their political allies who are telling small businesses they can't open, who are blocking Americans from going into their houses of worship, and who are ruining more families by the day.

America is suffering right now, but they are suffering because of the choices, the mandates, and the lockdowns being put in place by government. We all know the quote from President Ronald Reagan: ``The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: `I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.' ''

Well, I think there are about 3,800 more families who have loved ones in New York nursing homes, who would agree with that statement right now.

Government harm has gone on long enough. It needs to stop, yet we are setting up a process today to give hundreds of billions more to those very same State governments. The numbers

don't lie. Adding in the President's $2 trillion proposal from earlier this month, we will have spent $6 trillion in less than 1 year in so- called COVID-19-related stimulus. That is larger than the GDP of every country on Earth other than the U.S. and China. It is the equivalent of $17,000 per every American and $70,000 per household.

Do families really feel like they have gotten $70,000 out of their government in the last year?

No way.

What is worse is we have now crossed over. Government policies are now making the crisis worse, resulting in millions of needless deaths. Suicide rates among adults and children are way up. The U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research, just this past month, said that, over the next 15 years, more than 890,000 Americans could die as a direct result of the unemployment caused by COVID-related lockdowns.

Here was the headline in The New York Times last week: ``Surge of Student Suicides Pushes Las Vegas Schools to Reopen.''

Lockdowns, mandates, closures, virtual: It is unrealistic, not sustainable, and not the way.

Under remote virtual learning, students are not getting the instruction they need, especially those who may not have access to reliable broadband. Not to mention the mental health and emotional development needs that are not being met.

If we want to support families and communities, let's follow the science and let's reopen our schools. Our country is about giving Americans the power of information and letting them decide what is best for their family and for their loved ones, not government telling them: Stay indoors; don't see your family; and I am going to destroy your job, small business, and everything you have spent your life building.

So here we are, setting new precedent under the Democrat-controlled House. In more than 30 years, Congress has never voted on a House- originated budget that has not first gone through committee.

For what?

To bail out the very governments who are the ones costing families everything right now.

Is this how the Democrats intend to govern: to put Government ahead of the people?

I remind my friends that the power of the majority is a fleeting thing, and the American people are watching.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts. I will remind him that the government there in his State has already received $7.5 billion in bailouts and, under this plan, would receive an additional $7 billion. During the lockdown there in his State, more than 2,500 small businesses have been closed and the death rate has been more than the top five in the Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the great State of Colorado (Mrs. Boebert), who understands what it is like to run a small business and the burdens that government places on them.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cline), who proudly represents their Sixth District, a wonderful new addition to the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from New York. I will remind him that his State government has already received $28.5 billion in bail-out money and, under this proposal, would receive $20.5 billion under the plan; while that very same government has enacted some of the strongest lockdown policies in the Nation, resulting in the closure of more than 6,500 small businesses in the State of New York, with an unemployment rate currently at 8.2 percent. And the State of New York also has the second highest COVID- related deaths per capita in the Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte), an entrepreneur from California, a leader in his State legislature on budgetary issues, and a new member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the gentleman from Oregon saying that this is unprecedented. What is unprecedented is that this is the first time that a budget resolution that originated in the House bypassed the Budget Committee.

Reconciliation has been used numerous times, but this is the first time in the history of this country that the Democrats bypassed the Budget Committee in a budget resolution that originated in the House. The people are watching, Mr. Speaker.

I also appreciate the gentleman from Oregon. I will remind him that his State government has already received $4.5 billion in bailouts, and they will receive another $4.5 billion in bailouts while their State has locked down small businesses, costing more than 1,000 small businesses to close their doors.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), a true defender of commonsense, conservative values and a good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman from Texas. I will remind her, as we debate how to improve the economy, the administration's hostility to the energy industry, as demonstrated by his executive orders, threatens at least 120,000 jobs in the State of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Feenstra). As a freshman, he has already shown leadership as a true defender of conservative principles.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I will remind him that his State government has already received $14 billion in bailouts. They will receive another $13.5 under this plan while that very same State government has enacted lockdown policies, causing the closure of more than 3,000 of their small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Donalds), a great addition to the Budget Committee and a true leader.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Virginia. I will remind him that his State government has already received $6.5 billion in bailout money, and they will receive another $9 billion under this plan while that very same government has enacted lockdown policies directly leading to the closure of more than 2,000 small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the great Commonwealth of Virginia (Mr. Good), who already is a leader in this conference.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from California. I will remind him that his State government, yes, indeed, has already received $43 billion in taxpayer bailouts and will receive another $42 billion in taxpayer bailouts if this bill passes.

But let's talk about California. This is the State that has some of the most stringent lockdowns in the entire country. In fact, their lockdowns are so significant that more than 16,500 small businesses will never open their doors again. That is government that believes that it is okay to deny you to go to your house of worship and to eat out in an outdoor restaurant, but you can go to a strip club or get a tattoo. That is California.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the great State of Georgia (Mrs. Greene), a small businessowner who proudly represents the people of the 14th Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from New Jersey, and I wanted to remind the Chamber that his State government has already received $9.5 billion worth of taxpayer bailouts and under this proposal, would receive an additional $9.5 billion under this plan, while that very same government has enacted lockdown policies directly leading to the closure of more than 3,000 small businesses.

And that State, very sadly, actually has the highest per capita death rate of all States in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington), who represents the 19th Congressional District and has been an active participant in the budget process for as long as I have known him, a true defender of fiscal responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight that just in the last couple of days, the Congressional Budget Office released a report that, in fact, the economy will strengthen, grow, and recover without any additional stimulus dollars by the middle of 2021. You are looking at in just 5 to 6 months, the Congressional Budget Office said that the economy will recover without one single penny being spent of stimulus money.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), a leader on the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments, and the best way to help her constituents and to help those small businesses in the State of New York is to stop the lockdowns.

Mr. Speaker, we have more than $1 trillion that is lingering out there that has been appropriated to help these small businesses, to help healthcare professionals, to help with vaccinations. They are still hurting, but the money is still there.

Mr. Speaker, what is happening so bad in the State of New York is that they are not using science. They are using arbitrary items that have shut down more than 6,500 small businesses in the State of New York. Open up the State of New York so small businesses can operate and grow.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Banks), a distinguished Navy veteran, our leader on the Republican Study Committee, and a rising podcast star.

Mr. Speaker, the last 2 weeks, working-class Americans have faced a great target on their backs from the new President. By the stroke of a pen--47 different executive orders and actions--he has fired hundreds of thousands of American workers.

Mr. Speaker, by the stroke of a pen, in the last 2 weeks, the sitting President has fired hundreds of thousands of American workers who are wondering where their next paycheck will come from, who are wondering how they are going to pay their mortgage, who are wondering how they are going to survive in South Dakota, North Dakota, Texas, Wyoming, Colorado.

Just because this President was trying to unify his liberal base, he fired hundreds of thousands of American workers. It is war on the working class.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), a distinguished journalist.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Michigan, and I will remind him that his State government has already received $10 billion in taxpayer bailouts and will receive another $10.5 under this plan.

However, if President Biden wouldn't have done 1 of his 47 executive orders, his State would have received another $230 million. But the President shortchanged the State of Michigan by $230 million because of one of his 47 strokes of the pen in the last 2 weeks. So, I think the gentleman would be a little upset with his President for that action.

Also, because of the lockdowns, the State of Michigan has lost more than 3,500 small businesses. Such a shame.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jacobs), a great addition to the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Nevada for his comments and how we are eager to work in a bipartisan approach in this package. That is why we are kind of frustrated, because our committee has not even organized so that we could even have a discussion on a bipartisan approach.

Instead, the majority's side decided to force through this reconciliation without even going through the Budget Committee because they have not even organized.

So, I would love to work with them, but you have already closed the door. Hopefully, you will reopen it so we can discuss this, and I would love to work with him.

Also, in my State, in my congressional district, we have operated under what I believe are the best processes in fighting COVID, not locking down and shutting the doors on your small businesses.

We have some of the lowest unemployment rates in the State of Missouri, thanks to the leadership of Governor Parson. Also, we have the lowest death rates of COVID in our State, thanks to the leadership of Governor Mike Parson.

I wish the States of Nevada, California, and New York, and a lot of other States, would open up and stop the lockdowns and follow the science. Then, there wouldn't be bailout pieces of legislation to go to the States that have made the wrong choices.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Spartz), a true patriot.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Texas, but I would like to remind this Chamber again that the administration's hostility to the energy industry has demonstrated by just the stroke of a pen his executive actions have threatened at least 120,000 jobs in the State of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman), who is a veteran of the Budget Committee, whom I am glad to have back.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), who is a true defender of conservative principles.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, if this Chamber really cared about helping the working class, we would first call on the schools to reopen immediately; end the small business lockdowns so Americans can get back to work; and stop the President's job-killing executive orders, which are firing hundreds of thousands of Americans.

I stand ready, with my colleagues, on policies that will help support the working class. I look for the opportunity that we actually come into the Budget Committee, where we can work together and help the working class.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth), the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to begin by recognizing Chairman Yarmuth, whose leadership of the Budget Committee is so routinely remarkable that we take it for granted.

The budget resolution we are voting on today will set us on a path to defeating the virus and providing urgent relief for millions of Americans.

It is a big moment for this country, and this Chamber and Chairman Yarmuth have handled it with characteristic skill and grace.

I also want to thank Speaker Pelosi for her extraordinary leadership, guiding the House through all the challenges since this pandemic began and now bringing up legislation that is urgently needed and will ultimately sustain millions of Americans during this crisis.

President Biden has called for a package that meets the moment, and Speaker Pelosi has laid out a path that gets us there. The Speaker has guided this Chamber brilliantly as we passed the Cares Act; provided additional support to families and businesses in the spring and fall; and now, as we begin the expeditious process to beat the virus, get the American people the relief they need and deserve.

I am honored that she has asked me to lead the Joint Economic Committee this Congress as our country recovers and rebuilds. I look forward to partnering with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on the full range of economic challenges and opportunities before us. There is so much work to do.

This legislation will save American lives and give tens of millions of Americans the help they need.

Mr. Speaker, I am a businessman. One of my favorite ideas is: Don't show me your values; don't tell me your values; just show me your calendar.

Well, budgets are a statement of values. If you want to know what a person or a party really believes, look at how they allocate their resources. Show me your budget.

Four years ago, the Republicans held the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. Their signature legislation was a $1.9 trillion tax cut bill, which overwhelmingly favored the wealthy, the top 10 percent. That was a statement of their values.

Today, Democrats have the responsibility of governing, with Joe Biden in the White House and majorities in the House and Senate. We declare different values. The most important value is to save American lives. The second most important value is to restore American prosperity.

The budget resolution we consider today is a critical first step to achieving both overarching goals. We have to act quickly because those aren't the only overwhelming goals that we are facing.

Climate change. Secretary Yellen, in her confirmation hearing, called climate change an existential threat facing the globe. She is right, and we can't waste any more time. Temperatures are rising. Glaciers are melting. The frequency of forest fires is increasing, as is the frequency of once-in-a-hundred-year storms. Carbon emissions are out of control.

Soon, scientists say, we will reach a point of no return. Many believe we may already be there, and it doesn't help that the previous administration spent 4 years pretending that climate change didn't exist.

And infrastructure: Despite years of ``infrastructure weeks,'' we haven't moved the ball on infrastructure at all.

This harms our country in countless ways, not the least of which it makes the United States less competitive around the world. Bad for business, bad for consumers, harmful to the next generation.

Our roads are filled with potholes. Our bridges are falling down. Broadband doesn't reach millions of Americans and is priced out of reach for millions more. And on and on.

We have the opportunity to build back better a more equitable, inclusive, sustainable, and green economy. But we need policies that are aligned with the priorities and the needs of middle-class families, not geared toward the wealthy and the well connected.

This budget resolution reflects deeply held American values, preserving lives and health, and creating prosperity for every American. It reflects who we are, all Americans, and it deserves our complete support.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick response to my dear friend from Arizona. While we acknowledge that many of the States actually had increased revenues last year, virtually no locality did. I represent Northern Virginia, a fairly wealthy part, yet every one of our local governments is getting creamed. We had 1.3 million job losses in State and local government in 2020. That is not nothing.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan), the immediate past chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the most distinguished magician in the U.S. House.

Mr. Speaker, let me just point out that we are not throwing away our chance to work with Republicans. We would love to have a bipartisan bill, but if it's not possible, we have to have this reconciliation process in place because it takes weeks to unfold.

Mr. Speaker, we are in a deep hole. To build back better, we have to crush the virus, as Speaker Pelosi so beautifully captured. But make no mistake, the COVID-19 pandemic has plunged us into a very, very big hole.

Last week, we got the advance--or first--report on 2020 GDP, and it was ugly. The economy shrank by 3.5 percent last year, the worst economic performance since 1946. Very few of us were even born the last time our economy declined by this much. Let me say it again, the U.S. economy is the weakest it has been since the end of World War II.

It could have been worse. It could have been much worse but for the actions we took in a bipartisan way in this Congress. We passed the CARES Act in May, and instead of the 5.6 percent decline the CBO had forecast, we only got 3\1/2\ percent. Just imagine if the Senate had taken up the Heroes Act that we passed. Unemployment insurance alone, which was strengthened with the $600 supplemental payment and the creation of pandemic unemployment assistance, accounted for more than $550 billion in personal income in 2020. These payments were a lifeline to individuals, and they bolstered the economy.

We lost huge amounts of ground in the spring when second quarter GDP declined at a record 31.4 percent rate. That 4 percent in the fourth quarter helped, but not nearly enough to get us out of the hole.

As Fed chair Powell and others have made clear, the risk isn't doing too much. The risk is doing too little. This budget resolution before us recognizes that reality and uses it as a starting point.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), the distinguished chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, a member of the Joint Economic Committee, and my dear friend.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would agree with all of those economists who say go target, go big, and go targeted. In fact, that is what Joe Biden has said again and again.

I think his speech on the American Recovery Act was extraordinarily targeted, and while this budget reconciliation bill is the big picture, we all know that by the time we pass those individual budgets, they will be targeted at the most granular level.

And to my friend, Mr. Estes, with whom I serve on Ways and Means, I am glad that Kansas is doing well. I don't know the answer to this, but I would go back and see how it is going in Wichita and some of those local governments.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), one of the leaders in so many different ways of the U.S. House of Representatives, the former mayor of Providence.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to welcome our new colleague from Texas to the floor. An excellent speech.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters), a member of the Joint Economic Committee and a distinguished businessperson in his own right.

Mr. Speaker, can I ask how much time is remaining on our side.

Mr. Speaker, to my new friend from Texas, I would point out that Texas and California and New York--two of the bluest States around--are all net exporters of Federal dollars mostly to red States.

Now, it tends to be the blue States who are helping out the red States in terms of our Federal allocations. I would also like to compliment the ranking member on the Joint Economic Committee for his optimism in having a 5-year-old daughter.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib), the distinguished Member who spent her life lifting people out of poverty.

Mr. Speaker, last summer, when Donald Trump was pressuring governors to ignore the advice of health experts and reopen their economies, he was predicting we would

lead to a ``V-shaped'' recovery, in which the recovery would be as steep as the catastrophic decline.

Others predicted a ``U-shaped'' recovery, a more drawn-out version of the ``V.'' And even others predicted a ``W-shaped'' recovery, an uptick, followed by another drop due to a probable second wave of the coronavirus, and then hopeful improvement. Even Ian Bremmer talked about a scalloped recovery.

Mr. Speaker, there has been recovery, but with two big caveats. It has been a ``K-shaped'' recovery. It has come at the cost of over 440,000 American lives.

As the Trump administration pressured States to relax measures needed to control the coronavirus, the virus exploded. And this does have incredibly long-term cost on families, on generations in the economy.

But this ``K-shaped'' recovery, which has really come into vogue right now, is some are doing quite well and some are doing pretty poorly. High-income workers have been able to work from home and save record amounts of cash--I think a 33 percent savings rate in the second quarter.

The savings rate has gone through the roof because the paychecks, the stock gains, have kept coming in for those folks; but they can't spend it on restaurants or movies or travel, flights, entertainment.

American billionaires picked up $1.9 trillion in net worth in 2020. Just the increase in billionaires' net worth alone would pay for this package. The personal savings rate more than doubled in 2020. Housing prices climbed 10 percent in the last year. Stock market went up about 15 percent in the midst of the crisis. But, remember, the wealthiest 10 percent own 84 percent of the stocks. So they walked away with a vast majority of the stock gains last year, as they do every year.

These factors probably explained why households of more than $75,000 in income saved their $600 payments from December rather than spent them, as revealed in recent Opportunity Insights' data.

On the other side of the coin, low-wage workers have seen unemployment drop by 20 to 25 percent, and the unemployment rates for Black and Hispanic workers exceeds 9 percent. The rich have gotten richer. The poor have gotten poorer. And the American Dream has become ever-less attainable for too many Americans. A ``K-shaped'' recovery is unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), my friend of almost 40 years, my godfather.

Mr. Speaker, to add to my friend's charts, let me point out that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated, without additional resources, investment into the economy, it will take until 2024--3 more years--just to get back to where we were at the prepandemic level 1 year ago.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), and not the singer.

Mr. Speaker, I had the great honor of attending the Arlington funeral service for Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. It was moving and very sad, eloquent. I only bring this up because I was transported with my friend, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, to the cemetery and back with two Capitol Police Officers who were talking about how much they love their job but how exhausted they were at ages 40 and late 20s.

I asked them, ``What is your job?''

They said, ``We are security for the Speaker.''

And she is indefatigable, tireless, works around the clock, and, to my mind, is the best Speaker America has ever had.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time we have remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), the distinguished chairman of the Trade Subcommittee on Ways and Means and, in my opinion, the most thoughtful Member of the House.

{time} (1645)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia).

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the ranking member, for this hourlong discussion. I will point out that all those billions and maybe trillions of dollars that apparently are still in coffers, one of the best things we can do is get new management at the executive level who will actually spend the money allocated by Congress, and I think the Senate is working on those confirmations right now.

There is nothing that has the sense of theater about the children in Virginia who are three times as food insecure as they were a year ago. We have millions of Americans out of work. We have this remarkable chart that shows that our unemployment rate hit an official 14.8 percent back in the spring, and we knew that was undercounted by all the people who left the workforce who weren't counted at all. They said it was probably closer to 20 percent, the highest since the Great Depression.

Now, we are formally down to 6.7 percent, but, once again, that is double the pre-pandemic level and doesn't capture the nearly 5 million workers who have given up looking for a job and left the labor force since February. That would push the unemployment rate almost at 10 percent. We cannot afford to be passive.

My friend, Mr. Schweikert, talks about the multiplier factor, and I am a huge fan of the multiplier effect. But the multiplier effect means putting money in the hands of people who will spend it. So we are in defense of our $15 minimum wage. That is money that will go into the hands of people who will spend it that day, that Friday, that weekend.

Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, two prominent economists, found that fiscal monetary responses in 2008 and 2009 substantially reduced the severity and length of the Great Recession. Our wonderful chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jay Powell, a Republican, has said that monetary policy has gone as far as it can. Interest rates are near zero. It is up to us now, those who control fiscal policy, to make this comeback.

The Hamilton Project found that the Biden proposal would return us to the CBO's pre-pandemic projections after the third quarter of this year, not 2024 which would be where we were without it.

We face a once-in-a-generation challenge: a public health crisis caused a massive economic hit worse than the Great Recession, and responding to either one of these crises, the COVID or

the economy, requires a smart, multifaceted, comprehensive approach. It is not a blank-check approach. We have outlined piece by piece by piece how this money would be spent, and we still have much granularity to go. We have don't have the luxury of choosing which crisis we respond to. We have got to overcome both of them to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans and ensure the livelihoods of millions more.

Another luxury we don't have is time. We can't waste months and months and months trying to figure out whether we are actually going to spend that money in those coffers or whether bipartisanship will work. We have to set the structure up so that if reconciliation is necessary--the same reconciliation my Republican friends used on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act--it is ready to go.

The American people--Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and those who don't fit in any of those groups--want us to take action. Giving shots in people's arms, ramping up testing and tracing, ensuring unemployment benefits don't expire on March 14 and that they are there when they are needed most--I thank the gentleman, by the way, Mr. Schweikert, for piling on automatic stabilizers, almost every economist I know thinks that is a good idea--and helping families put food on the table. This is what Americans want. We need to move now to get our country and our economy back on track, and this budget resolution starts the process.

Today, we are taking a very important step for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 85, I call up the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 11) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2021 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2022 through 2030, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 11.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it has been roughly 1 year since the first COVID-19 case was diagnosed in the United States. Since then, more than 26 million Americans have been infected, and more than 440,000 have lost their lives.

Millions of Americans remain out of work as families are pushed to the brink of devastation. Our economy faces lows unseen since the Great Depression.

Food insecurity is climbing. Widespread school closures threaten to derail our children's education. And our most vulnerable communities are being forced to bear the brunt of these twin crises as underlying health and economic inequities grow worse.

Congress has previously come together to pass relief packages, but COVID is getting worse, not better. Our

recovery is painful and the most unequal on record. We are still deep in the trenches. We have to do more, a lot more.

As chairman of the Budget Committee, I promised that we would do everything our committee could do to support our recovery, which is why I introduced the 2021 budget resolution being considered today. This budget resolution was designed solely for one task: providing Congress with the option of using reconciliation to implement the American Rescue Plan and deliver the critical relief we need.

President Biden's American Rescue Plan lays out an aggressive legislative package to change the direction of these crises, including a national vaccine program; testing and tracing, paid sick leave to stop the spread, an extension of lifeline unemployment benefits that are set to expire in March; direct financial support for families; and support so schools can operate safely.

Our country desperately needs this relief, and economists across the ideological spectrum agree. Past crises have made it clear that doing too little will cost us far more. Weak support will lead to a weak, prolonged, and K-shaped recovery, posing more severe risks to our economic and budget outlooks than any deficits we might incur.

Without the American Rescue Plan, CBO estimates that it will take at least 3 years before employment returns to prepandemic levels. But with this vital support, economists estimate that we can bring the economy back to near full employment in a little over 12 months.

We have the plan and the ability to do this. And, thankfully, we can also afford to do it. Interest rates and inflation are at historic lows, lower today than even before the pandemic, and the return on smart investments in the economy has never been higher.

Economists of all stripes are telling us, begging us, to use the fiscal space we have. They are warning that if we don't go big, we will be responsible for a long, painful, and unequal recovery, one that will cost more lives and more jobs, that will cause more businesses to close and result in more damage to our Nation's economy, both in the short- and long-term.

The resolution's budget reconciliation framework sets a budgetary target of up to $1.9 trillion, the estimated cost of the American Rescue Plan, allocated across the 12 committees that have jurisdiction over some portion of the plan. The resolution instructs these committees to report legislation consistent with these budgetary targets to the Budget Committee by February 16. The Budget Committee will then combine the legislation and prepare it for floor consideration.

There will be plenty of opportunities for my colleagues across the aisle to engage in this process and offer amendments, but we cannot afford to slow down our response to these urgent crises while Republicans decide if they want to help or not.

The American Rescue Plan can be the difference between getting a vaccine or a virus, advancing to the next grade or falling behind, keeping the doors open or shutting down businesses for good.

The choice is clear. I look forward to passing this resolution and ensuring Congress delivers the American Rescue Plan to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the passionate words of the ranking member, and I failed to hear one instance in which he expressed concern or any ideas about how to help the hundreds of thousands of Americans who will die if this government does not act quickly and aggressively; or the hundreds of thousands of businesses that will close; or the schools that he wants to reopen, which we all want to reopen. We are looking for ideas, but so far all we have had is resistance and obstruction.

The President this week actually met with 10 Republican United States Senators in an effort to get a bipartisan approach to the crisis we face. I would still hope that we can do that, but we can't afford to wait for that to happen. That is why this process is in place, giving plenty of opportunity for the Republicans in both the House and Senate to participate and to help us find a better plan to move forward.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), who is the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to respond to the notion that this is a radical plan. The radical, very radical chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Trump, Kevin Hassett, said:

But I think we need to be risk-averse and pass another

relief package. There are so many businesses treading water,

barely hanging on. Now they are getting hit by another shock.

You could end up in a negative spiral for the economy.

January 22, 2021, the radical Kevin Hassett.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva), the distinguished chairman of the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the gentleman from California to both Congress and the Budget Committee and I look forward to working with him. I will advise him that in just a few weeks he will have the opportunity, as a member of the Budget Committee, to go through a markup, offer amendments to the plans that will be proposed in another budget resolution that will actually come to the floor. So I look forward to that discussion and hope that will satisfy the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the chair of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson), the distinguished chair of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I welcome the gentleman from Iowa to the House of Representatives, and I will correct him.

There is no 10-year budget outlook in this budget. This is a single budget resolution, only for this fiscal year, designed to facilitate the use of the reconciliation package to implement the President's American Rescue Plan, which, by the way, he campaigned vigorously on throughout his campaign.

While Republicans were saying, ``Oh, it is too early to do something. Let's pause. Let's wait. Let's do this,'' the President was aggressive. The President was creative, forceful, and the American people rewarded him with a victory.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brendan F. Boyle), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I welcome the gentleman from Florida to the House of Representatives. I really think that we ought to stop talking about States bailing other States out. The next time that a major hurricane hits Florida, we are not going to say that New York and California don't want to help them. That is not the kind of body that I hope we are.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor.

Mr. Speaker, I know it is fascinating, and I have heard this argument now year after year after year talking about how much every individual in this country has owed because of the debt--the national debt. We have been accumulating debt in this country for most of our 240-year history.

I ask the gentleman: Has there ever been one American citizen or one American citizen's ancestor who has ever paid any of that debt or who has ever been asked to pay for that debt?

Of course not. That is because we are a sovereign currency nation. We don't pay attention to that.

And just to clarify one thing he said, he said spending money has never helped in a crisis. Well, you will find virtually no economist who will not say that what we did last spring when we passed the CARES Act helped us mitigate the very first few months of this disaster. We didn't do enough then. We can't make the same mistake now.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), the distinguished chair of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The gentlewoman from Georgia said that this plan is going to destroy the economy. I think it is interesting that the American Rescue Plan has received praise from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the National Retail Federation, among other business groups, and top economic advisers from the last four Presidents: Kevin Hassett, who I mentioned earlier from the Trump administration; Gene Sperling; R. Glenn Hubbard; and Alan Blinder have all said that additional spending is needed to rescue the economy.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from my friend from Texas, and I remind him that this, as I said in my opening statement, is plan B. We would prefer not to do this. We would prefer to have a bipartisan, regular order solution to this. We could do it actually more expeditiously than the reconciliation process.

But when Republicans, in an effort to be supposedly bipartisan, offer $600 billion--when virtually everyone says we need relief and rescue money approaching the $1.9 trillion figure--it is not genuine, bipartisan, good-faith negotiation. That is posturing.

We will have several weeks to reach a bipartisan agreement. I hope we can. But this is plan B. And we will proceed with it because the American people can't wait as long as the Republicans seem to be able to.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Georgia an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the distinguished chair of the Committee on Small Business.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the distinguished chair of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. Speaker, I want to welcome the gentlewoman from Iowa to the House of Representatives and just remark that when she said that this is a plan that was crafted in secret, this plan was crafted during the 2020 campaign. It was part of President Biden's agenda, and every American voter had a chance to register his or her support for that plan.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire from the Chair as to how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), who is a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), who is the chairman of the Democratic Caucus and a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond to my friend from Texas, to say that, in about 3 weeks or a little less, the Budget Committee will have a piece of legislation which actually goes into the details of the American Rescue Plan and includes those. There will be a markup. The gentleman will have every opportunity to offer amendments, and then that bill will come to the floor as well. So don't give up hope.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

We will have a floor debate as well. In regular order, the gentleman will go through the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Sires), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), another distinguished member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the names of the Budget Committee staff who worked so tirelessly and competently on this piece of legislation.

Budget Committee Majority Staff List

Erika Appel

Ellen Balis

Samantha Carter

Edward Etzkorn

Jose Guillen

Jocelyn Harris

Emily King

Sarah Lee

Sheila McDowell

Diana Meredith

Kimberly Overbeek

Barbara Pike

Katie Raymond

Scott Russell

Laura Santos

Raquel Spencer

Greg Waring

Alexandra Weinroth

Christie Wentworth

Jennifer Wheelock

Ted Zegers

Grady Stevens (intern)

Mr. Speaker, for the record, nothing in this proposal should come as a surprise. The resolution's budgetary target matches the estimated cost of the American Rescue Plan, every detail of which was put forward during President Biden's campaign. Further, many of these provisions have already passed the House but languished on Senator McConnell's desk.

Nothing we are doing here precludes a bipartisan deal. But let's be clear, the American people overwhelmingly support President Biden's plan.

And I can assure you they couldn't care less about House procedures. They want us to act and get them the relief they need now.

January was the deadliest month yet for COVID. Every 28 seconds, an American died from the coronavirus. At that

rate, more than 385 Americans will have died while we are debating this resolution.

We cannot afford to slow down. We need to hurry the hell up.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 85 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, today the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 85, providing for consideration of H.R. 447, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Scott, makes in order 26 amendments, provides en bloc authority to Chairman Scott, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 11 under a closed rule. It self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Yarmuth. It also provides 3 hours of debate with 2 hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget and 1 hour equally divided and controlled by Representatives Beyer of Virginia and Schweikert of Arizona, or their respective designees.

The rule also provides that H. Res. 73 is hereby adopted. The rule updates the process by which Members can appeal fines for refusing to wear a mask or for taking photographs or recording audio or video on the House floor to align with the Ethics Committee appeal procedures established in H. Res. 73.

Finally, the rule extends standard district work period instructions, same day, and suspension authority through March 12, 2021.

Mr. Speaker, the National Apprenticeship Act is critical workforce development legislation that will invest $3.5 billion to create nearly 1 million new apprenticeship opportunities over the next 5 years. This is a history investment in workforce training, and I am so pleased to support this effort.

Skilled workers are the backbone of our economy. And apprenticeships provide a unique opportunity to grow and expand access to this workforce.

Not only do apprenticeship programs provide pathways to meaningful and sustainable careers, they are critical to expanding our Nation's skilled workforce. When I meet with local businesses in my district in Rochester, New York, I regularly hear that their greatest challenge is finding skilled labor to fill positions and keep their businesses thriving.

Apprenticeships provide an invaluable pathway to engage workers, establish connections with high-demand industries, and set workers on a path to a rewarding and sustainable career.

I note that as the son of an individual who dropped out of high school at the age of 16, my dad, after service in Korea in the United States Army, came home and got involved in an apprenticeship for the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 13 Union and had a long, long career where he retired at the age of 70 after having supported a family of seven. What was directly responsible for that was the apprenticeship program and his ability to build that sustained career.

I am particularly proud that a bill I introduced with my colleague, Congresswoman Trahan, has been included in the text of the National Apprenticeship Act. Our bill helps scale up participation among populations not typically engaged in apprenticeships, particularly small- and medium-sized businesses, and together we can create new opportunities in high-demand industries.

Now, more than ever, these programs are critical to grapple with the long-term economic impacts of COVID-19.

This week we will also begin the next phase of addressing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic through H. Con. Res. 11, a budget resolution for fiscal year 2021. Passing this budget resolution is a necessary step to fast-track essential COVID relief, the American Rescue Plan.

This plan will deliver the direct support the American public needs, including a national vaccination program, direct aid to individuals and families, housing and nutrition assistance, and expansion and extension of unemployment insurance, small business assistance, and resources to protect first responders and frontline workers.

Our Nation has endured an unprecedented health and economic crisis which has now claimed the lives of nearly half a million Americans. After 11 months, far too many Americans are still barely scraping by or falling further behind, through no fault of their own, as they lose jobs or see smaller paychecks. We need immediate, bold action to change the course of the virus and stabilize our economy.

Beginning the budget reconciliation process does not preclude a strong bipartisan agreement on a relief package that can gain wide support in both the House and the Senate. Let me repeat that. It does not preclude a strong, bipartisan agreement on a relief package that can gain wide support in our House and across the building in the Senate. But it does ensure that Congress will be able to move forward without becoming delayed by partisan gridlock at a time when so many lives and livelihoods are at stake.

The budget resolution before us provides a framework for reconciliation with a target of up to $1.9 trillion, allocated across 12 congressional committees. The resolution instructs these committees to report legislation consistent with their targets to the Budget Committee by February 16. The Budget Committee will then combine the legislation--without substantive revision--and prepare it for floor consideration.

The 2021 budget resolution is not a comprehensive blueprint for the next 10 years. It is designed solely to respond to the ongoing crisis and to deliver critical relief as quickly as possible.

Once we have finished the work of passing a complete COVID response package, I look forward to continuing our work on the Budget Committee to craft a complete forward-looking budget resolution for fiscal year 2022.

We have already lost so much time. Passing this resolution ensures that relief can get to Americans in need, who cannot wait another minute for help.

Mr. Speaker, I would also take a moment to recognize that, less than 1 month ago, this Chamber was besieged by antidemocracy extremists who intended to harm this institution and even kill some of our colleagues.

The rule provides penalties for any Member of the House who endangers colleagues by violating the rules of this Chamber. Members are not, under any circumstances, permitted to bring firearms on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. That has been in law and regulation since 1967.

As President Ronald Reagan said: ``Trust, but verify.''

Mr. Speaker, with that in mind, there should be no problem with requiring Members to walk through metal detectors into the Chamber, ensuring that everyone is following the same rules, ensuring the safety of each and every Member of this body, and ensuring that many members of our staff who work here day in and day out are protected.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule and H. Con. Res. 11 and the National Apprenticeship Act.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I first want to say to the distinguished gentleman, my friend: These are not partisan priorities; these are American priorities.

I doubt very much that most Americans care about the process we use as they struggle to feed their families or as they struggle to pay their rent each month, when they face unemployment that could be extended. But here is an opportunity for us to work together. This is the beginning of the process, and we will continue to encourage bipartisan discussion on a budget resolution that provides meaningful relief for millions of Americans affected by this virus.

As it relates to the National Apprenticeship Act, I would also suggest that this is a bipartisan bill. I can name the Members of my colleagues across the aisle: Mr. Fitzpatrick; Mr. McKinley; Members Bacon and Bost; my friend, Rodney Davis, from Illinois; John Katko, whose district abuts mine; Andy Garbarino, my friend from New York; Representatives Stauber, Kinzinger, Stivers--all Republicans who support and sponsor the National Apprenticeship Act. So this is a bipartisan bill, and I will continue to advocate for its passage.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I will admit that there are few people I respect more than my distinguished colleague and friend from the Rules Committee, the ranking member, Mr. Cole.

But I think as it relates to the budget, as I understand it, the Budget Committee chair, Mr. Yarmuth, has continued to extend an invitation to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work together.

And we do want to work together. We want to forge a bipartisan agreement. This today begins a process, however, that can move us toward reconciliation because we understand that the American people are in crisis. America is in crisis.

So while we need to move ahead, and we would like to move ahead with a bipartisan agreement, we cannot sit idly by in the instance that progress is not made.

I think it was President Kennedy in his inauguration, nearly 60 years ago, who said, ``Sincerity is always subject to proof.'' So prove to us your sincerity. Let's work together. And in the interim, we are going to move ahead with this resolution with the support of the Members, and I certainly hope that they will do that.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman's point, I appreciate the passion with which the distinguished ranking member of the Budget Committee makes his argument, but why are we moving ahead, he asked.

Why we are moving ahead today?

The President ran on this very relief agenda and won the popular vote in the United States by more than 8 million votes. We are moving ahead because elections do matter, and the argument that President Biden made is that this country needed swift, significant, and robust relief. That is why we are moving ahead.

Now, I will continue to say--and I am sure my colleagues will continue to say--that the Democrat majority invites bipartisan conversation. We would invite all the Members on the other side to come together in a meaningful way to talk about unemployment insurance for the millions of Americans who are out of work, through no fault of their own--millions.

Hundreds of thousands are filing every week for the first time. Millions of Americans don't have enough food on the table. One out of every eight Americans are saying they don't have enough money for food to put on the table.

This is for the millions of Americans who don't have enough money to pay their rent or pay their mortgage, and for the millions of small businesses--or the tens of thousands of small businesses struggling every single week, again, through no fault of their own.

Why are we moving ahead today?

Because there is no more time left on the clock. We need to move ahead in order to provide the substantial relief.

I would also suggest that those who will say that this is too expensive, you only look to find economists all over this country beginning with the head of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, who was appointed by the President to his position, who has consistently said that the worst thing we can do is make too small of an investment. We must

make a robust investment. It is what President Bident talked about repeatedly through this campaign.

There is no hidden agenda here. This is, in fact, the agenda that was talked about repeatedly throughout the campaign. The American public resoundingly responded to the package that the President has now put forward, the package which we would like to take up. We would certainly like to do it with our brothers and sisters on the other side of the aisle, but we are prepared, if not, to respond to the needs of millions of Americans who are in crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Once again, I just say that those Americans who are watching what we do here today and over the next several days, they are going to be asking the question: What are you doing in Washington that will help the average man or woman and child who suffers the ravages of this disease and the economic fallout?

When I talk to people in Rochester, New York--and I am sure when each of us goes back to our home districts--people aren't asking about the nuance of legislative procedures. They are asking about what the government is going to do for them as we face the greatest pandemic in a century and the greatest economic challenge in nearly a century both at the same time. We have so many other challenges as well, but the House of Representatives is going to move forward. This resolution does that. It says that we will certainly encourage bipartisan agreements, bipartisan conversations, and bipartisan action.

The President's conversations with members of the Senate yesterday indicate his willingness to do that. But we cannot wait. We have waited far too long. Too many Americans have died and too many families have faced the crisis of their lifetimes because of the inaction here in Washington. So we must move ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support of the rule before us today. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.