Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the success of American companies is usually measured by market share, the strength of the balance sheet and the quality of goods and services that they produce. But many times, we can also look to the quality of a company's employees to find the true secret to their success.

Nucor Steel-Texas, which is located in Jewett, Texas, in the Fifth Congressional District, is a major economic driver in Leon County and the state of Texas. For almost 24 years, Lynda Minter has served Nucor Steel-Texas and will soon retire as Controller. Lynda's colleagues have told me that Nucor Steel-Texas' success is inseparable from her legacy of careful financial management and her superb relations with employees, Nucor leadership and with state and local community leaders.

Lynda has been characterized by her co-workers as a pillar of the mill's success, and those who know her best have testified that her kind manner, deep understanding of Nucor's business and fair dealing have been instrumental in Nucor Steel-Texas' continued growth and achievement. Her colleagues tell me that Lynda has offered Nucor Steel- Texas a steady hand, a keen intellect and a long-term devotion to service for over two decades.

I want to take this opportunity to recognize the contributions of Lynda Minter, and I want to wish Lynda all the best as she embarks on this new phase of her life.

Mr. Speaker, as a former small businessman, I rise today in support of Republican efforts this week to reduce the regulatory burden on small businesses, the job engine of this country.

I know firsthand that the Federal regulatory burden strangles small business in America and keeps American-owned businesses from creating more jobs. In the year 2000, the estimated total regulatory burden in America was a job-crushing $843 billion. Along with high rates of taxation, which Democrats want to raise even further, nothing stifles job creation in America like the heavy hand of bureaucratic regulation.

Small businesses that employ fewer than 20 employees pay almost $7,000 a year in regulatory costs per employee. Instead of using these funds to create new jobs, pay higher salaries or fund new or expanded health care benefits, small business owners are forced to pay to comply with too many inflexible and Draconian Federal regulations.

Democrats are working hard to make bureaucrats more powerful. Mr. Speaker, Republicans are working hard to make American companies more competitive.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my 5 minute Special Order at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise again as part of the Washington Waste Watchers, a Republican working group dedicated to rooting out the

rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in the Federal Government.

Despite a major economic recovery underway, rising employment, new jobs and historic rates of home ownership, Democrats keep demanding that we take away the tax relief, take away the tax relief that is responsible for this unparalleled growth in our economy, the tax relief that is bringing down the unemployment.

The tax relief, if it were a line item in the budget, amounts to 1 percent, 1 percent of the $28.3 trillion 10-year spending plan approved last year. In other words, 99 percent of our fiscal challenges are on the spending side. And, Mr. Speaker, that is where we need to focus our attention, and by any measure, spending is out of control in Washington.

For only the fourth time in the history of our Nation, the Federal Government is now spending $20,000 per household. Mr. Speaker, it is up from just $16,000 just 5 years ago, representing the largest expansion of the Federal Government in 50 years.

We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem, and now is not the time to raise taxes again on American families and small businesses, as Democrats seek to do. Instead, it is time to take the trash out in Washington. Let me give my colleagues just a few examples of typical waste, fraud, and abuse in government that we found just this week.

The Interior Department's Inspector General discovered that the Bureau of Indian Affairs accepted inflated school enrollment estimates that resulted in the construction of schools that were larger than required. The Bureau spent $37 million for unneeded school space and has future plans to spend an additional $74 million for even more excess school space. This wasteful use of our tax dollars occurred because the Bureau had not developed or implemented simple policies to count students. And yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for even more of this? One hundred and eleven million dollars of the American people's hard-earned money down the drain. That is enough money to outfit 3,700 Humvees in Iraq with armor plating.

Additionally, the Department of Transportation's Inspector General stated that if the Department simply imposed better oversight on projects from start to finish and aggressively fought gas-tax evasion, the Department could save billions of dollars. In fact, if the efficiency with which the Federal Government and the States invested $700 billion in highway projects was improved by only 1 percent, an additional $7 billion would be available, and that could fund 8 out of the 15 active major highway projects today.

This is especially relevant because the House voted recently to approve a $284 billion highway bill that will force Congress to either increase the deficit or raise gas taxes to pay for it.

Next, Mr. Speaker, just this week the GAO announced that the government paid $169,000 in fees to unaccredited schools for bogus graduate degrees for Federal employees. I mean, that is a blatant violation of Federal law. The General Accounting Office said this amount was actually an understatement and that it is impossible to verify the true cost of this fraud because the Federal agencies do not have systems to verify academic degrees and because they do not accurately account for these expenses. In fact, the Department of Health and Human Services, when asked by the General Accounting Office to verify expenses on degrees, said they could not produce them because they maintain such large volumes of information in five different accounting systems.

One hundred sixty-nine thousand dollars on bogus degrees. That is enough money to protect over 100 of our American soldiers in Iraq with Kevlar vests.

Mr. Speaker, the list goes on and on and on; so does the waste, the fraud, the abuse and the duplication, and this has been going on for decades.

The problem is, we now have over 10,000 Federal programs spread across 5- to 600 agencies with little accountability to anyone, and when you just scratch the surface a little bit, what you discover is that so many of these programs routinely waste 5, 10, even 20, 25 percent of their taxpayer-funded budgets, and have for decades.

Republicans are working hard to root out this senseless waste of American tax dollars, but too many of our Democrat colleagues keep fighting us every step of the way. Last year, our Committee on the Budget approved a budget asking for authorizing committees to identify 1 percent of waste, fraud and abuse, just 1 percent. Yet the Democrat leaders ridiculed and reviled our efforts. One Democrat leader termed it ``a senseless and irresponsible exercise.''

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that most Americans disagree. With the Nation at war and with a large budget deficit, there is no better time to root out this waste, fraud and abuse than now, because when it comes to Federal programs it is not how much money Washington spends that counts, it is how Washington spends the money.

Mr. Speaker, I rise again this week as part of the Washington Waste Watchers, a Republican working group dedicated to rooting out the rampant waste, fraud and

abuse that permeates every corner of the Federal bureaucracy.

I hope that soon the House of Representatives will be able to vote on a conference report for the fiscal year 2005 budget. Now, we have historically a large deficit in this Nation; and at this time, many of my Democrat colleagues suggest that it is time to yet again raise taxes on American families. Just last week, many voted against marriage penalty tax relief, the very same marriage penalty that would raise taxes on 30 million married couples by $369 next year.

Many Democrats keep demanding that we roll back the tax relief that is responsible for the unparalleled growth in our economy, the tax relief that is creating jobs; and the tax relief, if we look at the budget, amounts to 1 percent of the $28.3 trillion, trillion with a T, 10-year spending plan that we approved last year.

So if they are truly concerned about the budget deficit, perhaps they should focus on 99 percent of the challenge, and that is, the spending side of the equation, much of which, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately proves to be waste, fraud and abuse.

We must all realize that the deficit is the symptom. It is spending that is the disease. It is only the fourth time in the history of our Nation the Federal Government is now spending over $20,000 per household. This figure is up from just 5 years ago of $16,000 per household, representing the largest increase in the Federal Government in 50 years.

We have a spending problem in Washington, not a taxing problem; and I, for one, say it is not time to raise taxes on the American family as many Democrats seek to do, but it is time to get serious about rooting out the waste, the fraud, the abuse.

In other words, it is time to take out the trash in Washington. Let me give a few examples of waste in just one government agency. The Interior Department's Inspector General revealed that the Department now manages approximately 31,000 separate Web sites, presenting between 3 and 5 million pages of information with maintenance costs approaching $220 million a year. Now, AOL-Time Warner, who I believe is the largest Internet service provider in the world, manages in contrast about 50 sites, but the Interior Department manages 31,000 different Web sites. In an agency that employs 70,000, that means the Department of Interior has almost one Web site for every two employees.

Yet Democrats want to raise our taxes that would pay for more of this?

The Inspector General also reported at the Interior Department that we awarded $44 million in Federal contracts to the CEO of a tribal Indian corporation who stole and laundered a half million dollars in Federal funds.

The Guam Waterworks Authority, which receives Federal grants, incurred outrageous overtime costs of $8.6 million over a 3-year period, failed to collect delinquent accounts totaling $12.6 million, and failed to charge customers for a half million cost of water line extensions, all of this while using money from the Federal taxpayer. Yet Democrats want to raise taxes that will pay for more of this?

In another example, the National Park Service spent $800,000 on an outhouse, and it does not even work. The only thing it flushes is more of the American worker's hard-earned money down the drain. The list goes on and on and on.

Mr. Speaker, these are just a few examples of waste in just one Federal agency. The problem is we have over 10,000 Federal programs spread across 600 different agencies with little accountability to anyone. Republicans are trying to work to root out this waste of the American tax dollars. This should be a bipartisan issue, but many of our Democrat colleagues continue to fight us.

Last year our Committee on the Budget passed out a budget asking for authorizing committees to identify just 1 percent waste, fraud and abuse; just 1 percent. Yet Democrat leaders ridiculed the effort. One termed it a senseless and irresponsible exercise.

Mr. Speaker, I believe most Americans would disagree with that statement. In fact, I believe most would say saving taxpayer money and rooting out waste is common sense and the responsible thing to do with their money. The truth is there are many ways we can save money in Washington without cutting any needed services and without raising taxes on our hard-working American families because when it comes to Federal programs, it is not how much money that Washington spends that counts, it is how Washington spends the money.

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to congratulate the Lady Cards basketball team from Trinity Valley Community College in Athens, Texas, for winning the National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) Women's Basketball National Championship.

The top ranked Lady Cards capped off a perfect 36-0 season with a 77- 66 victory over Gulf Coast, Florida, in the title game of the NJCAA Women's Championship.

The Lady Cards' victory is Trinity Valley Community College's fifth national title in women's basketball and the college's second undefeated season. The Lady Cards have an unbelievable 66-1 record over the last two seasons and currently hold a 78-game regular season winning streak.

I would like to recognize team members Jennifer Harris, LeKeisha Carter, Chanae Early, Daiane Packer, Alona Obaze, La'Courtney Ratliff, Vanessa Silva, Vanessa Clementino, Yolanda Jones, Ashley Streetman, and Jennifer Jones.

I would also like to recognize the head coach of the Lady Cards basketball team, Michael Landers, who was named the 2004 Women's Basketball Coaches Association Coach of the Year. Coach Landers has amassed an impressive 352-24 record over his career and 126-8 record in his four years at Trinity Valley Community College.

Congratulations to Coach Landers and the Lady Cards on their remarkable undefeated season in 2004 and their tremendous National Championship victory.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, today this body has one very important decision to make. Do we really want to raise taxes on married couples by bringing back the unfair marriage penalty to our Tax Code? Do we really want to tax the institution that represents the greatest social welfare program in the history of our Nation; in other words, the American family? Do we really want to start rolling back the tax relief that was responsible for making the U.S. the fastest growing economy in the world last year, the tax relief that has helped bring about the highest rate of home ownership in the history of our Nation, the tax relief that has helped create over three-quarters of a million new jobs and the tax relief that has actually brought in more tax revenue to our U.S. Treasury? That is right, tax relief by promoting economic growth has brought more tax revenue into the U.S. Treasury.

Mr. Speaker, the answer should be a resounding no. If we choose to revive the marriage penalty, 30 million married couples will face an average tax increase of $369 next year. The same number of couples will see a tax increase of more than $700, starting in 2011. I mean, that is a rental payment or two for an apartment, a home computer for a son or a daughter. It is weeks of child care. At a time when tax relief is fueling our economic recovery, now is not the time to raise taxes on families or reinstitute unjust penalties on married couples who are working hard to realize the American dream.

I urge all of my colleagues to defeat the marriage penalty, defeat this substitute and support H.R. 4181.

Mr. Speaker, as the U.S. Congressman representing White Rock Lake in Dallas, I would like to recognize the invaluable contribution made by the young men of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to the development of White Rock Lake.

With the dedication of the new CCC statue at White Rock Lake Park, we honor the lasting contribution of the approximately 3,000 young men who, over the course of seven years, spent six months to two years learning a trade and performing a valuable public service.

These young men labored diligently, making a host of improvements to White Rock Lake, including deepening and widening the lake, constructing, clearing underbrush, and building bridle paths, trails, picnic grounds, barbecue pits, shelter houses, thousands of feet of retaining walls and planting hundreds of pecan trees. One of their major accomplishments was the creation of the park at Flag Pole Hill, which we still enjoy today.

Today, I recognize the ``boys in green'' from the CCC Camp at White Rock Lake and thank them for their hard work as we dedicate a new statue in Sunset Bay to honor the outstanding contribution they made in helping build our community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. Speaker, recently there has been a great deal of discussion, angst and some protectionist legislation concerning the so- called outsourcing of American jobs to foreign countries. In fact, companies choosing to purchase services abroad have been termed ``Benedict Arnold'' companies by some.

But despite all the inflammatory language and distorted facts, the truth is that outsourcing is only one side of a two-way street known as free trade. Almost one-third of our economy is dependent upon that two- way street. Thus, we should examine the little-noticed other side of the street called insourcing.

Data from the Commerce Department shows that during 2003, the U.S. posted a $53 billion surplus, surplus, in trade and private services with the rest of the world. We outsourced $77 billion in services overseas, but foreigners turned around and insourced $130 billion of services from the U.S. In other words, foreigners demand more of our services than we demand of theirs.

Unfortunately, Americans are presently hearing only one side of the outsourcing story. They only hear about the jobs that are going out of the U.S. They do not hear anything about the jobs coming into the U.S.

According to the Treasury Department, insourcing accounted for 6.4 million jobs nationwide in the most recent survey; and these insource jobs paid 16\1/2\ percent more than the average domestic job. Even though many foreign workers work for less, jobs are insourced into the U.S. because our workers tend to be better educated. They tend to have better skills. They tend to be more productive. We can compete internationally.

If you want to get a better idea of the kind of insourcing coming to America, let us just take a look at the automobile industry. Honda is hiring 2,000 new Americans in Alabama to build SUVs, and Nissan will add more than 2,000 jobs by expanding their plants in Tennessee and Mississippi. Toyota will add 2,700 jobs in my home State of Texas in the next 2 years. In fact, Mr. Speaker, foreign corporations now employ almost half a million workers in my home State. Nearly one in 10 jobs in the U.S. is directly linked to the export of U.S. goods and services.

Now, protectionist anti-outsourcing legislation unfortunately threatens each and every one of these jobs. If we do not permit the outsourcing of jobs overseas, other nations will not permit the insourcing of jobs into the U.S. It is free trade that creates more job opportunities for the unemployed, increases their wages and improves the standard of living for American workers. Free trade also delivers a greater choice of goods and services to our consumers at lower prices. That means American families get better products using less of their paycheck.

Competition has always helped the consumer. It does not matter if that competition comes from Canada or Kentucky. Over the past few years, prices have dropped for a wide array of goods and services that face foreign competition. For example, TVs cost 10 percent less; computers cost 25 percent less. Yet we pay a lot more for services that do not receive foreign competition, goods and services, for example, college tuition, prescription drug goods, and cable TV service.

Those who care about creating jobs and reducing unemployment here at home should stop fighting free trade and its outsourcing component and start fighting the root cause of job flight overseas, mainly too many taxes, too many regulations, and too many frivolous lawsuits.

The Small Business Administration found in the year 2000 that Americans spent $843 billion complying with Federal regulations. Too many mind-numbing regulations send jobs offshore.

Mr. Speaker, the cost of litigation now accounts for one-third of the price of the aluminum ladder. It doubles the price of a football helmet, and it adds $500 to the sticker of a new car. Too much litigation sends jobs offshore.

The United States has a higher corporate tax burden than any industrialized nation with the exception of Japan. This even includes several of the former Soviet bloc countries. Too much taxation sends jobs offshore.

Mr. Speaker, beyond the obvious economic benefit of free trade, fundamentally we must recognize that nations do not trade with nations; people trade with people. Every American citizen and every American company should have the right to determine the origin of the goods and services they want to purchase.

With the exception of national security considerations, it should not be the role of the Federal Government to tell consumers or companies where they buy their goods. Besides our financial well-being, it is our fundamental economic liberty that is at stake.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

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

Mr. Chairman, first I want to congratulate the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) on his great work to produce a truly fiscally responsible budget. It takes a big step in the right direction. But the Republican Study Committee budget takes even more steps in the right direction.

Budgets are so much more than green eyeshade exercises for accountants. They are so much more than esoteric econometric modeling. Beyond the numbers, they are really about values and priorities. The values and priorities of the budget I offer today are simple, less government and more freedom. Of all the budgets introduced in Congress today, none, and I repeat none, contain less government or more freedom than the Republican Study Committee alternative which I have the honor to introduce today.

Permit me to summarize what this budget does. First, for only the second time in a decade, we would actually reduce the size of government. In the aggregate, we reduce nondefense discretionary spending by 1 percent and reduce the rate of growth in mandatory spending by 1 percent. Why is this important? Because it is a fact. It is an eternal truth that as governments expand, liberty contracts. That means fewer opportunities for Americans to choose the best health care for their families, to choose the best educational opportunities for their children, or to find the best job in a competitive market economy.

Secondly, this budget fully funds the Commander in Chief's defense and homeland defense request. This is a Nation at war. For many years this Nation ran a defense deficit with deteriorating infrastructure, outdated equipment, and lagging military pay. We must continue to close this defense deficit because there can be only one outcome to this war, victory for freedom and defeat for terrorism.

Next, Mr. Chairman, this budget cuts the deficit in half in 3 years. As the father of a 2-year-old daughter and a 6-month-old son, I take a back seat to no one regarding my concern about the deficit. But we must all realize that the deficit is a symptom. Spending is the disease. And by any measure, spending is out of control. For only the fourth time in the history of our Nation, the Federal Government is now spending over $20,000 per household. This figure is up from just 5 years ago of $16,000 per household, representing the largest expansion of government in 50 years. Last year, what we call mandatory spending reached 11 percent of our economy for the first time ever. Nondefense discretionary spending is now almost 4 percent of the economy for the first time in 20 years, and almost every major Department of the government has grown precipitously way beyond the rate of inflation.

Besides being out of control, much of this Federal spending, unfortunately, is just pure waste, fraud, and abuse.

Until recently, Medicare had routinely paid as much as five times for a wheelchair as the VA had, simply because one bid competitively and the other did not. In the last year of the Clinton administration, HUD wasted over 10 percent of their budget making improper payments, $3 billion lost. We spent almost $800,000 for a toilet in one national park and the toilet did not even flush. And we are just scratching the surface here.

Example after example shows that many Federal programs routinely waste 5, 10, 15, 20 percent of their taxpayer-funded budgets and have for decades.

Mr. Chairman, this has got to stop. Government is inherently wasteful. It does almost nothing as well as we the people, and it must be limited. And until we do limit it, we will never prioritize, much less root out the waste, the fraud, the abuse that permeates every corner of our Federal budget.

Again, this Republican Study Committee alternative is the only budget that actually reduces government and thus begins the vital process of protecting the family budget from the Federal budget.

Next, Mr. Chairman, the RSC budget promotes economic growth by providing tax relief, $183 billion over 5 years. This will ensure that we do not imperil our economic recovery by raising taxes as all the Democrat alternatives propose to do. This figure accommodates the President's request and will help ensure that tax relief such as the child tax credit and the marriage penalty tax relief will not be canceled.

Now, my friends on the other side of the aisle have said that tax relief represents a huge government expenditure that creates huge deficits. They are wrong. First, it is not the government's money; it is the people's money. Secondly, when it comes to the deficit, the tax relief is miniscule compared to the spending, roughly $180 billion over 5 years compared to over $13 trillion of spending over the same time period. In other words, if you do the math, tax relief is only 1 percent of total spending. One percent.

If the Democrats truly care about budget deficits, they should focus their attention on the spending side of deficit, which represents 99 percent of the problem.

Finally, tax relief has proven to be part of the deficit solution, not part of the deficit problem. Tax relief has helped ignite our historic economic recovery, created jobs, and brought our unemployment rate down. And most importantly with respect to the deficit, Treasury reports show that after cutting tax rates, we increase tax revenues. That is right. Tax revenues are up.

The final thing that the Republican Study Committee budget does is to ensure we live up to our commitments to the American people. In other words, when we pass a budget, we enforce that budget. Too often through advance appropriations, so-called emergency spending and other devices, Congress has ignored its own budget. This too must stop. Through closing loopholes and creating Family Budget Protection Accounts, the Republican Study Committee budget takes a giant step towards ensuring that Congress indeed means what it says when it passes the budget.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, budgets are truly about priorities and values as much as they are about numbers. Our budget prioritizes the family budget over the Federal budget. It values less government and more freedom. For the sake of our own children and the future of the Nation, the Republican Study Committee substitute should be adopted by the House.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.

If the gentleman is concerned about spending, this budget actually does cut spending. I would encourage him to sponsor it. Additionally, 99 percent of our deficit problem is on the spending side. So I do not understand why 99 percent of the rhetoric is on the tax side, on the other side.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.

Medicaid spending is up 89 percent since 1995, and if the other side is concerned about the affordability of health care, perhaps they would join us in doing something about tort reform, medical liability reform and excess government regulation.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, budgets are about values. They are about priorities. This is a budget that indeed values less government and more freedom. It prioritizes the family budget over the Federal budget. We have had a lot of talk about the deficit, and the deficit is a very serious problem in our Nation. But the deficit again, Mr. Chairman, is a symptom. Spending is the disease in our society. By any measure, it is spending which is out of control. When we are spending over $20,000 per American household for the first time since World War II and for only the fourth time in our Nation's history, spending is out of control. We hear about all of these massive cuts. But, Mr. Chairman, I do not see them. Since 1995, Medicare spending is up 54.6 percent. Medicaid spending is up 89 percent; Labor-HHS-Education appropriations since 1998 are up 71.6 percent; Interior appropriations in the same time period are up 42.1 percent. And the list goes on, always outstripping the rate of inflation.

But, unfortunately, the same is not true with the family budget. Since I have been on the face of the planet, the Federal budget has grown seven times faster than the family budget. I believe this is an unsustainable and unconscionable growth rate. It is time for us to finally protect the family budget from the Federal budget.

By adopting the Republican Study Committee alternative, we take the first step towards doing that. We have had a lot of debate about tax relief as well, and we certainly have a philosophical debate with our friends on the other side of the aisle. But, Mr. Chairman, once again, we have cut tax rates; and guess what, we have more tax revenues because we have given tax relief to small businesses, we have given tax relief to families. They have gone out, they have rolled up their sleeves, they have created new businesses, they have expanded their businesses. This should not be news. The same was true during the Reagan administration. We cut rates, and we had more tax revenue. The same was true in the Kennedy administration. It is the thing to do when you are facing a recession, put money in the pockets of the people.

Our friends on the other side of the aisle speak about spending priorities. I, too, want to spend more money on housing. I want to spend more money on nutrition. I want to spend more money on health care. I am just not indifferent as to who does the spending. Democrats want the government to do the spending. We want families to do the spending. And we know the difference. The family is who needs to be protected in this budget process, Mr. Chairman. Once again there is only one budget here, one budget that will actually reduce the size of government, and that is the Republican Study Committee alternative.

And so, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, if budgets are indeed about values and priorities, this is a budget that values less government and more freedom. It is a budget which prioritizes the family budget over the Federal budget. I encourage my colleagues to adopt it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I paid very special attention to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm)

when he spoke about the budget deficits. I too am very concerned about budget deficits. I have a 2-year-old daughter and 6-month-old son. I do not want to leave them a legacy of debt. I want to leave them a legacy of freedom and opportunity.

Mr. Chairman, the American people are not undertaxed. We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. If Members pay very careful attention to the budget, what they will see in the Republican budget is over 5 years almost $13 trillion of spending contrasted to $150 billion of tax relief. In doing the math, you figure out the tax relief is roughly 1 percent of the spending; so I do not understand why, if 99 percent of the deficit problem is on the spending side, 99 percent of the Democrats' rhetoric is on the taxing side. It does not add up.

We have a spending problem. Spending is out of control. For only the fourth time in the history of the United States, the Federal Government is now spending over $20,000 per American household. This is the highest figure since World War II. This figure is up from approximately $16,000 per household just 5 years ago, representing the largest expansion of government in 50 years.

Last year, what we termed mandatory spending is now 11 percent of our economy for the first time ever. Nondefense discretionary spending is now almost 4 percent of our economy for the first time in 20 years. Almost every major Department of the government has grown precipitously, way beyond inflation. In the past 6 years, spending has grown 71.6 percent for Labor, HHS and Education appropriations. In the past 6 years, spending has grown 42.1 percent for Interior appropriations. The Commerce, State and Justice appropriations has grown by 24.3 percent over the same time period, and the list goes on and on and on.

The Republican budget controls government spending. The Democrat budget expands government spending. But besides spending being out of control, much of this Federal spending, unfortunately, is pure waste, fraud, abuse, and duplication. Until recently, Medicare routinely paid as much as five times as much for a wheelchair as the VA did simply because one would competitively bid and the other would not. In the last year of the Clinton administration, HUD wasted over 10 percent of their budget, making improper payments to people who do not qualify. It was almost $3 billion lost.

Now let us talk about duplication. The Federal Government has 75 different programs funding international education, 90 different programs aimed at early childhood development, 342 different economic development programs.

Now let us return to waste. Twenty-three percent of the students who have had their student loans forgiven for disability actually hold full-time jobs. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent of taxpayer money to study the sexual habits of older men and the nature of two-spirited individuals. I do not know what we are supposed to do with the results of these studies, and I do not even know what a two- spirited individual is.

We spent almost $800,000 for a toilet in a national park, and the toilet does not even flush. For decades, for decades, for decades, example after example shows that many Federal programs routinely waste 5, 10, 20, even 25 percent of their taxpayer-funded budgets. Yet every Democrat budget offered raises taxes and raises government spending, which ends up paying for even more duplication, more waste, more fraud, and more abuse.

This has to stop. Government is inherently wasteful. It does almost nothing as well as we the people, and government must be limited. Until we do limit it, we will never prioritize, much less root out the waste, the fraud, the duplication that permeates our Federal budget. The Republican budget actually limits government and thus begins the process of protecting the family budget from the Federal budget.

Our effort to limit government and expand freedom is being criticized by many on the other side of the aisle. Last year, our Budget Committee passed out a budget asking for authorizing committees to find just 1 percent of waste, fraud and abuse, just 1 percent. Yet Democrat leaders ridiculed and reviled our efforts. One termed it a ``senseless and irresponsible exercise.'' But they were wrong last year, and they are wrong today.

Some may say you control government now, wave your magic wand and make it all disappear. Permit me to make an observation from my past which I think applies today. My first job as an adolescent was to clean out chicken houses on my father's poultry farm. What I learned there was that one does not clean up overnight what took many years to accumulate.

What has accumulated in government over many decades is now 10,000 different Federal programs spread out over almost 600 agencies with little oversight, little accountability or even little knowledge of what these programs do, if they achieve their goals or even if they are still relevant today. The question is, who wants to help clean up this mess and who wants to leave it alone? Only a Republican budget actually limits government. The Democrat budget expands government; and as government grows, freedom contracts. Let us expand freedom and protect the family budget from the Federal budget. Let us pass the Republican budget resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with several of my colleagues from the Washington Waste Watchers, a Republican working group dedicated to rooting out the rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in the Federal Government.

Over the last 3 weeks, my colleagues on the Committee on the Budget have been discussing the Federal budget and debating the growth of government spending. With a historically large deficit and with Federal spending now exceeding $20,000 per American household for only the fourth time in American history and for the first time since World War II, many Democrats say, it is time to raise taxes yet again on the American people. Democrats are demanding that we roll back the tax relief that is responsible for the unparalleled growth that we have had in our economy, the tax relief that is bringing down our unemployment, the tax relief that amounts to only 1 percent, 1 percent of the $13.1 trillion 5-year spending plan the Committee on the Budget approved today. In other words, 99 percent of our budget woes lay on the spending side.

Clearly, Mr. Speaker, we have a spending problem, not a taxing problem in this town. And I, for one, say it is time to take the trash out of Washington. It is time to go after the costly waste, fraud, and abuse that permeate every nook and cranny in our Federal Government.

Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Well, Mr. Speaker, each and every year, we pour more money into the Federal Government with scant accountability; and we continue to throw billions of dollars of American taxpayers' money away in waste, fraud, and abuse.

Let me discuss just a few examples. The Office of National Drug Control Policy awarded one advertising agency a $150 million grant to craft ads keeping American youth away from drugs, even though this company had a history of overbilling the Federal Government. In 2002 the firm had to repay the government $1.8 million for overstating its labor costs, and some representatives of the company are currently under indictment for filing false claims. Now, the ads are part of a 5- year, $1 billion campaign whose effectiveness has been greatly scrutinized. A private research firm concluded that teenagers viewing the ads were no less likely to use drugs than if they had not viewed them and that some were even more likely to use drugs. False claims and ineffective ads, yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for more of this.

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, is currently undertaking a major crackdown on phoney claims for power wheelchairs and has recovered $52.5 million thus far. One 89-year-old from Florida said that she and her husband were approached by a salesperson who pressured them into an unnecessary order. Medicare was then billed $15,500 for two scooters, a hospital bed, and a pressure mattress, none of which was needed. Another senior citizen testified in court that a claim had been submitted without her approval. She then demonstrated her lack of a need for a wheelchair by walking before the jurors. Mr. Speaker, $52 million in fraud, yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for even more of this.

The Drug Enforcement Agency contracts with the private sector to get translators and transcribers in many of its field divisions. However, the Inspector General's Office found such loose controls were in place that $2.8 million of the $9.4 million paid was going to unauthorized and unallowable expenses. Yet Democrats want to raise taxes to pay for more of this.

In the year 2000, an investigation discovered that the Department of Energy spent more than $38 million developing information systems that it already had. They already had the systems in place. Yet Democrats want to raise taxes to pay for more of this.

Mr. Speaker, these are just a few examples of the rampant waste in our Federal Government. After we begin to look closely, we see that so many Federal programs routinely lose 10, 20, even 30 percent of their taxpayer-funded budgets to waste, fraud, and abuse and have for years.

There are so many different ways that we can save money in Washington without cutting any needed services or without raising taxes as our Democrat colleagues seek to do. Because when it comes to Federal programs, it is not how much money we spend that counts, it is how Washington spends the money that counts.

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to extend my warmest congratulations to Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, TX, on the occasion of their 40th anniversary.

Education is one of the most important issues facing the future of our great Nation. If America is to continue to be the leader of the modern world, we must offer a solid educational foundation for our citizens. To succeed in school and life, every student needs a basic set of skills. They need to listen attentively, speak persuasively, read with understanding, and write with command.

Over the past 40 years, Lake Highlands High School has maintained a commitment to academic, athletic and artistic excellence and community service. Lake Highlands High School has produced 17 National Merit Finalists in the last 2 years alone, along with district championships in nearly every athletic competition offered.

Since I was elected to Congress, I have visited Lake Highlands High School many times. Clearly, Lake Highlands High School is an institution dedicated to offering students a well-rounded education and an opportunity to become genuine leaders.

As the Congressman for the Fifth Congressional District of Texas, I am very proud to represent Lake Highlands High School, it's teachers and it's students. I would like to offer my congratulations to their administrators, alumni, coaches, students, and parents on this momentous occasion and best wishes for their continued success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as cofounder of the Washington Waste Watchers, a Republican working group dedicated to bringing the disinfectant of sunshine into the shadowy corners of the wasteful Washington bureaucracy.

As we speak, Congress is engaged in a debate over spending and the Federal budget. With a historically large deficit, Democrats are advocating that our answer is to raise taxes on American families. Democrats demand that we roll back tax relief, the tax relief that is responsible for the strong growth in our economy, the tax relief that is bringing down unemployment, the tax relief that amounts to only 1 percent, 1 percent, of the $28.3 trillion, 10-year spending plan that we passed last year.

In other words, Mr. Speaker, 99 percent of the challenge in dealing with our Federal deficit is on the spending side. Clearly we have a spending problem, not a taxing problem in America; and I, for one, say when it comes to Federal spending, it is time to take out the trash. It is time to go after the costly waste, fraud and abuse that permeates every nook and cranny of the Federal Government.

Mr. Speaker, this body will soon take up the issue of transportation funding. Transportation is important. It is important to our economy; it is important to jobs. But before we sign a huge check drawn on the bank account of American families, should we not do everything that we can to ensure that every dime of transportation funding goes to roads, and not rip-offs?

Let me give you just a few examples. The Department of Transportation has historically squandered the hard-earned money of American families. Roughly two-thirds of Boston's ``Big Dig'' central artery is funded by Federal tax dollars. This has been called the greatest public works scandal of modern times.

This federally funded project has repeatedly exceeded cost estimates and lagged behind schedule. Is that not a surprise? But in the year 2000, the project was already five times more expensive than planned, $11 billion over budget. An investigation revealed that project managers consistently were dishonest in their reporting of the project. $11 billion of bloated budgets and mismanagement, and yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for more of this?

Today the Federal Government is picking up 80 percent of the cost for a $1.4 million project to upgrade just three bus shelters in upstate New York. For more than $1 million of American taxpayers' hard-earned money, these bus shelters are going to be equipped with ``radiant heating systems'' and a layout ``designed to appeal to passengers' sense of security.'' Even some of the beneficiaries of these new mansion-like bus shelters had concerns with its cost. One of the residents said, It just seems like a whole lot of money to me. Maybe they could just put some glass doors up.

American families are lucky if they can afford $150,000 for a home, and the Federal Government is going to use their money to pay over $370,000 apiece for bus shelters? And yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for more of this?

Another investigation revealed that 29 Federal contracts worth roughly $62 million were paid without any knowledge of whether they were even legally authorized. $62 million that was not legally authorized, and yet Democrats want to raise our taxes to pay for more of this?

Mr. Speaker, these are just a few examples of the rampant waste, fraud and abuse and duplication in just one Federal agency. After you begin to look closely, you will discover that in many Federal programs, routinely they will squander 10, 20, even 30 percent of their taxpayer- funded budgets, and have for years.

There are many ways that we can save money in Washington without cutting any needed services and without raising taxes on our hard- working families, as Democrats seek to do. Because when it comes to spending, Mr.

Speaker, and Federal programs, it is not how much money you spend that counts; it is how Washington spends the money.