Mr. Chairman, today Members of Congress faced two budget resolutions. The choice is a clear one between bigger, more expensive and more intrusive government versus fiscal discipline based on key priorities. Now, fiscal discipline is hard,…
Mr. Chairman, today Members of Congress faced two budget resolutions. The choice is a clear one between bigger, more expensive and more intrusive government versus fiscal discipline based on key priorities.
Now, fiscal discipline is hard, which is why it is not always popular. It is easy for some to vote to increase government spending, but ultimately someone must pay for it. It is common to hear about the ``government'' doing this project or that project. We hear a lot about the ``government'' spending money, but we must not allow the idea of ``government'' doing something to lead us to forget that, ultimately, ``We the People'' are the ones who have to pay for what government does. The nineteenth century economist Frederic Bastiat once said that ``government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.''
Although the Federal Government is not known for its fiscal discipline, we are now facing a budget that exceeds even the most fevered imaginings of history's biggest spenders. It would enact the largest tax increase in history--an almost $400 billion increase.
This is one path, and it is the one down which the new Majority proposes to take us. We also had the opportunity to take another path, a roadway to a balanced budget without raising taxes on working Americans.
The choice is clear. The Democratic budget would do serious harm to Idahoans, their families and their businesses. The Democratic budget would: Raise taxes on 436,000 Idahoans who benefit from the current 10 percent tax bracket; force 176,000 married couples in Idaho to pay for an increase in the marriage tax penalty; force 133,000 Idahoans with children to pay higher taxes because of the expiration of the current child tax credit; and raise tax rates on capital gains and dividends for 74,000 Idaho investors, including Idaho senior citizens.
The Democrats are demanding that hardworking Idahoans further subsidize the already bulging government coffers. More than that, the reckless increases in entitlement spending included in their bill would require that generations to come pay for our present unwillingness to make tough decisions.
As many know but few heed, the explosive rate of entitlement spending is simply not sustainable. If the current rate of federal entitlement spending remains unabated, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will consume 20 percent of the Nation's economy annually by 2040. If trends continue, entitlements will take up over 60 percent of the entire Federal budget in less than a decade. Our Nation is one of great prosperity, but no nation can expect to maintain economic and political greatness by feeding government programs at the expense of working families.
Few will be untouched by this vicious money-grab. Seniors, married couples, parents, small business owners, lower-income earners--all will be forced to turn over more of their earnings to the Federal Government.
In contrast, I support the Republican-offered substitute budget. The Republican budget reaches a balanced budget by 2012, but retains the important tax cuts adopted in 2001 and 2003. The Republican budget does not arbitrarily raise the 10 percent bracket to 15 percent; it preserves the current 10 percent rate. Lower-income earners need that money more than the government does. The Republican budget: Stops raiding the Social Security surplus; reins-in unsustainable, runaway entitlement spending by slowing the rate of annual entitlement spending growth, thereby saving money for the taxpayers; prepares for the future by budgeting in advance for national emergencies and crises; refines and strengthens the so-called ``pay as you go'' (PAYGO) rules to require that spending increases be offset with spending reductions instead of increasing taxes; caps discretionary spending through 2010 so Congress cannot simply throw more money at problems that require real solutions.
In short, we in Congress are accountable to our constituents. We must remember that real people and their livelihoods are at stake back home. If we wish to help those back in our districts, we must bear in mind that we do not have all the answers here in Washington. Congress did not earn the money that we took in taxes. It was hard-working Americans that earned it. If we fail to make the direly-needed tough choices about runaway spending, we are merely fostering a tax-and-spend culture that demands our constituents make pay a greater sacrifice in their earnings.
This is an unacceptable demand to make. Thankfully, the President has said he would veto the Democratic bill. Yet unless Congress begins to take seriously the need for economic growth, tax reduction for families and balancing the Federal budget, relying on the nation's Chief Executive to exercise his veto pen is like depending on a child to put his finger in the leak of a dyke. It will only work for a short time. We've got to do better, soon.
Mr. Ortiz. Mr. Chairman, Federal budgets reflect our values as a nation. This Nation has rejected passing the monumental debt run up by this administration and past congresses on to their children. We are bringing a new fiscal direction to our budgeting process.
Correcting the fiscal course of the country will not be easy, or fast. We did it before, but success only comes with the hard work of passing budget and appropriations bills every year . . . unlike the way past Congresses did it: not paying the bills, running up huge waves of debt in the form of higher taxes on our children. We're about to start doing this right.
Our fiscal outlook deteriorated dramatically over the past 6 years. In 2001, the administration inherited a projected 10-year (2002-2011) budget surplus of $5.6 trillion. After paying for tax cuts for the richest among us, that surplus was gone. Between that and the 9-11 attacks, the United States accumulated a mountain of debt, adding $2.8 trillion to our Federal debt burden since 2001. Most of this debt has been purchased by foreign investors, making the U.S. economy more vulnerable to economic and political instability and political pressure from abroad.
Deficits matter. It is our moral responsibility to start cleaning up the fiscal chaos wrought by the last Congresses and the President. Living beyond our means comes at a cost to our children and grandchildren who will have to pay off that debt. The irresponsible economic policies of the past 6 years have left a debt burden of $29,075 for a typical middle-income family of four in Texas.
Deficits also hurt economic growth by slowing down national savings, which leaves us less to invest in our future. That means lower productivity and wages for future workers. The President's budget continued the fiscal approach that has brought us large deficits and growing debt.
This budget is in sharp contrast to the trend of spending our children's money like mad. Today's budget takes the necessary steps to eliminate our long-term budget deficit by adhering to the pay-as-you-go principle, just as families at kitchen tables do every day across the country.
A balanced budget must include balanced priorities. For the first time in 6 years, the congressional budget resolution will balance the Federal budget--in 2012--while also defending our country, delivering critical services to children and families, caring for our veterans, educating our children, and growing the U.S. economy.
The 2008 budget is the blueprint for the new direction we are taking the American people. It provides greater deficit reduction than the administration in the first 5 years, leading to a budget surplus in 2012 . . . we pay for the budget as we go, not as we hope we'll have a windfall of money . . .
I am particularly pleased at the matters affecting South Texas, including:
The largest veterans' budget increase in American history--$3.5 billion more this year ($32 billion over the next 5 years) for veterans' health care than the President's budget.
Greater investment in areas that deal with homeland security, rejecting the cuts to vital first responder and terrorism prevention programs included in the President's FY 2008 budget. Under the President's budget, the State Homeland Security Grant Program--which awarded $277,028,279 to Texas from 2003 to 2006--would be slashed by 52 percent. The Law Enforcement Terrorist Prevention Program (LETPP)-- which awarded $70,936,283 to Texas from 2004 to 2006--would be eliminated.
Funds to begin implementing the 9/11 Commission recommendations to make Texas and our nation more secure.
Investments in a 21st Century Workforce for a growing economy and protects middle-class taxpayers.
Increasing funding for State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)--in Texas, where previous budget cuts left 1,366,710 children without health insurance.
Rejecting the administration's proposal to cut Medicare funding by $1,586,784,434 for Texas hospitals, skilled nursing facilities and home health care providers.
Providing substantially more funding for Texas' 4,365,200 children enrolled in public elementary, middle and high schools--providing nearly $8 billion more in 2008 and 11 percent more over the next 5 years for education and training programs than requested by the President.
Increasing resources for No Child Left Behind, special education and Head Start--rejecting the harsh cuts and underfunding for these critical education programs in the President's budget.
I urge my colleagues to adopt this budget, and begin a new era of fiscal sanity and investment in our greatest resource--Americans.