Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I join my fellow Blue Dog, the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Case), in speaking about the deficit and debt crisis that our Nation faces. He gave a lot of stunning numbers. Let me put it on a time line.

What are the milestones that we are facing as a Nation? First, the year 2004, the year past, the Comptroller General of the United States, David A. Walker, said that arguably it was the worst year in American fiscal history, clearly setting our Nation on an unsustainable path. Those are tough words, and they are from our Nation's leading auditor. Arguably the worst year in American fiscal history.

Our history goes back many, many decades, and it stretches through periods of trial and turmoil, like World War II, the Civil War, and other conflicts. Yet the year 2004 was the worst year in American fiscal history according to the Comptroller General.

Now, in 2005, what has happened in our budget and deficit this year? The House Republican majority ran through last week on Thursday night, under a so-called martial law rule, the entire budget of the United States of America, $2.6 trillion. And from start to finish, from first time to look at the budget to final passage in this body was no more than 2 to 3 hours of time. Literally, no one in this body had any clue what was in the budget because no one can read a document of that complexity in that short amount of time, especially under a martial law rule.

Let us look forward. By the last year of the Bush administration, by the year 2008-2009, we will be spending, according to the House Republican budget, more money on interest payments to the creditors of our Nation than we will be spending on all regular government in America. Let me repeat that: more money will go to creditors of our Nation, bond holders, than to the citizens of our Nation in regular government, at least in the form of domestic, nondefense discretionary spending. That is a tipping point. That is an outrage. And that is the result of profligate Republican spending policies, the latest evidence of which is in this Cato Institute report that came out on May 3, 2005, that says the Bush administration is the worst spending administration since Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Let us look forward. The Wall Street Journal reported about a month ago that if current trends continue, the last living U.S. bond holder will sell his or her holding to the People's Bank of China on February 9, 2012. Then the Chinese will own virtually all of our foreign-held debt. That is not a good situation for the security of our Nation, either defense security or fiscal security.

Let us look forward again. The year 2017. That is the year in which the Social Security surpluses will run to zero, and that will be the first year in modern times that the American people will get an honest picture of the size of the Federal budget deficit. Because no longer will the Social Security surplus be able to be used to hide the true size of the Federal deficit. For example, in 2004, most folks, most experts think the deficit was $412 billion. Wrong. The real deficit was $567 billion, or $155 billion larger than is represented, because our government has used the Social Security surplus to hide the true size of it.

Let us look forward again. By the year 2040, only 35 years from now, if current trends continue, the Comptroller General of the United States says that it will take all revenues collected by the Federal Government, every dime collected in taxes from our people, just to pay interest on our debt. This is a truly stunning finding of the GAO, because it indicates that there will be no money left by the year 2040 for any national defense, any Social Security, any Medicare, any money to meet the needs of our people.

Clearly, Mr. Speaker, that is an unsustainable path. Clearly, I think we need Presidential leadership. Because being practical, even though we have a strong package of Blue Dog budget deficit reforms, even though both parties should come together, it is hard for a group of 435 in this body or 100 people in the other body to exert the leadership that the President should be demonstrating. But the President has vetoed no legislation during his entire Presidency. He has not disciplined Congress in any way. He is the first President since James Garfield in 1881 to fail to veto a single measure of this body. President Garfield was only in office for 6 months before he died. President Bush has been in office for 5 years now.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to focus on the deficit and debt crisis that this Nation faces.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I would like to ask a question on this, because I think it is a very significant chart the gentleman is pointing out.

It is my understanding it took the first 204 years of American history to run up $1 trillion in debt, and that chart seems to demonstrate, what, that in just 2 or 3 years--

So to put the cookies on a low shelf, it took the first 204 years to do $1 trillion worth of damage to our Nation, and now the Republican majority is doing that every 18 months?

If the gentleman will yield further, this is probably hard for the folks back home to understand, and I know it is hard for many Members here to understand, but this news simply has not gotten out to the American people. It is my understanding that, what, votes on raising the debt ceiling anymore do not happen?

Numbers do not lie. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. So the total national debt now is about $7.7 trillion.

We pay the interest on that debt largely to foreign nations now, right? More and more foreign nations are lending us this money, so we are owing more and more money to foreign nations, is that correct?

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, Japan, China, Europe, nations like that, we will have to write checks to for many, many years in order to service the interest.

So almost half the mortgage on America is owned by foreigners, and they have been kind to lend us that money, but they could change their minds and stop lending us money at almost any time? Because we sell Treasury bonds, notes, other papers, every day in the market.

What happens if we cannot pay the debt?

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman mentioned we certainly do not want to inflate the currency, but the dollar today is weaker than it has been in some time, the dollar vis-a-vis foreign currencies. If an American travels abroad and pays in dollars, you discover today it buys very little under Bush administration policies. A few years ago it used to buy a whole lot more. That is a sign of a weak dollar that we are already facing today because of our dependence on foreign borrowing.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I did not mean to distract from your presentation.

I think it is important to return to the fact that we are going to be voting tomorrow on the budget for the United States of America, and it is a budget that no one has seen yet. They only appointed the conferees yesterday.

$2.6 trillion, covering all of the priorities of this great Nation, the fact that we are at war, Social Security and Medicare, all domestic spending, cancer research, CDBG grants, everything is rolled up into it and no one has seen it.

Now, last year we did not have a budget at all, so maybe the prospect of voting on a budget this year is a good one. But from all that we do know of the budget, and we will probably vote on it apparently about 2:00 tomorrow afternoon, it will be crammed down our throats with no one having seen the text of it. And the New York Times and responsible publications like that are saying it is really the worst of both worlds. It is going to help the people who need it the least and hurt the people who need it the most. It is going to hurt poor people. It is going to hurt middle-class people. It is going to hurt small businesses. It is going to hurt our schools, and that is irresponsible budgeting.

I would be delighted to yield to the gentleman.

I believe they recommended a $60 billion cut in Medicaid.

Well, unbelievable cuts are in this and unbelievable aid to countries like Iraq. It is really a crazy set of priorities and unbelievable tax cuts.

One thing we know will go up is interest expense on the national debt because the deficits are the largest in American history. It is getting harder and harder to blame 9/11 for that because they have produced the largest deficits in American history year after year after year, as this chart shows right here. As the gentleman illustrated earlier, the sea of red ink is continuing; deficits, the largest in

American history, as far as anyone can see.

All the experts, including Chairman Greenspan of the Federal Reserve, say right now under these Republican budgets we are clearly on an unsustainable path, a literal road to ruin for our Nation. And the head of the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, David Walker, has said the same thing. In fact, he pointed out that 2004 was the worst year in American fiscal history, the worst year in our entire Nation's fiscal history because we are piling up deficits in such an irresponsible fashion. It is time for that to stop, but the situation will not be helped tomorrow when they cram down a budget on us that literally no one has seen. But if it resembles the House Republican budget or the Senate Republican budget, it is likely to be bad news for the American people.

The gentleman makes a great point because we have gone from the prospect of being a debt-free Nation to being one of the most indebted nations in the world.

In fact, there is a tragic tipping point that will occur in the last year of the Bush administration, because in that year, and this is according to the House Republican budget, we will actually be spending more on interest payments to our creditors than we spend on all regular domestic government in America. So in a sense it will be a better deal to be a bond holder of this country, even a foreign bond holder, than to be a citizen of this country. And that is the classic result of budget mismanagement which we are seeing year in and year out under this administration.

The gentleman mentioned earlier that in early 2006 they will be asking for another increase in the debt ceiling, perhaps even 2005.

On car loans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary contributions of Dr. James A. Hefner, President of the Tennessee State University, and to congratulate him on the occasion of his upcoming retirement on May 31, 2005.

During 14 years of leadership as President of TSU, Dr. Hefner has operated under the motto that ``a passionate faculty are the most important instruments of change in the academic environment.'' He is indeed ``passionate'' about encouraging students to reach higher academic heights and he is a strong advocate for excellence in education.

Dr. Hefner has helped countless students realize their educational goals and subsequent contributions to the community. Under his leadership, enrollment at TSU has grown from 7,405 in 1991 to 9,100. Dr. Hefner has elevated the standing of TSU to the extent that, for the past 11 years, the University has been consistendy recognized in the U.S. News & World Report's ``Guide to America's Best Colleges.''

His rich career has spanned many areas of academia. Dr. Hefner has held positions as president of two universities, administrator, professor, writer and speaker. He credits the single common element of his success to his devotion to students. He strives to improve the education and financial conditions of minorities and is recognized as a renowned authority on minority economic issues. Dr. Hefner has authored 50 articles on economic research and authored or co-edited two books: Black Employment in Atlanta and Public Policy for the Black Community: Strategies and Perspectives. He has served on many regional and national boards and associations dedicated to scholarship in economics, labor relations and public management. He is a consultant to the Congressional Black Caucus, the National Institute of Public Management, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Department of Transportation. In addition to numerous honors, publications and professional leadership positions, Dr. Hefner was awarded the Presidential Leadership Award from the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education (the organization's highest honor) and the Achievement Award in Research.

On behalf of the Fifth District of Tennessee, I join with Tennessee State University as they celebrate Founders Day to thank my friend and colleague, Dr. James A. Hefner, for his generosity, commitment and dedication to American scholarship and service to the State of Tennessee. I extend my heartfelt congratulations on his retirement and wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored today to introduce as our guest chaplain my good friend Reverend L.H. Hardwick, Jr., the senior pastor of Christ Church in Nashville, TN.

Reverend Hardwick was born and raised in Nashville, and he attended the Freewill Baptist Bible College before he was called to the ministry at the remarkably young age of 18. Dr. Hardwick has held honorary doctoral degrees from the Moody Theological Seminary and Emmanuel Bible College. Reverend Hardwick is truly remarkable and has dedicated over 54 years of faithful service to his congregation as pastor of Christ Church.

The reverend has tirelessly led Christ Church through three moves due to growth, and now the church has over 3,500 members and is listed as one of the fastest growing congregations in America.

A dedicated community servant as well as pastor, Pastor Hardwick has been appointed by the Governor of Tennessee to serve 8 years on the Board of Trustees of the State Mental Health Association. He is a member of the Metro Pastors Association, 12 of Nashville's most distinguished ministers. He has been a key part of the board of Operation Andrew, which is the outreach board for Pastor Billy Graham and his ministry in uniting the body of Christ in Middle Tennessee. This year, Pastor Hardwick and his wife, Montelle, are celebrating their 55th year of marriage.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is again an honor and privilege to be able to welcome such a distinguished individual to the U.S. House of Representatives. Pastor L.H. Hardwick, Jr., is truly a fine man and did a wonderful job in delivering our opening prayer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Michelle Bullock Marrs of Nashville, Tennessee. Michelle Marrs was the Chief Executive Officer of the Matthew Walker Comprehensive Health Center in Nashville. She was a dedicated health-care advocate for all Tennesseans, especially the poor, uninsured and underserved. The community suffered a great loss when she passed away on Wednesday, March 16, 2005.

Michelle Marrs was born on July 13, 1952 in Louisburg, North Carolina. She attended grade school in Louisburg and Raleigh, and went on to receive a Bachelors Degree from North Carolina Central University and a Masters in Education from Harvard University. Before moving to Nashville, she served as the Chief Executive Officer for the Metrolina Comprehensive Health Center in Charlotte, North Carolina, where she was instrumental in generating significant funding for a Women's Center and Teen Clinic. She also dedicated much of her time to mentoring young women who were beginning their careers in healthcare.

Michelle's numerous public service awards included the 2004 Urban Legend Award for exemplary contributions for empowering communities and changing lives; The Ladies of Distinction Incorporation Award for dedicated service to African American Women in Healthcare in 2004; the Jefferson Street United Merchants Partnership Living Legend Award in 2003; and the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Public Service Award in 2000. Michelle was an officer on the board of the Greater Nashville Black Chamber of Commerce and she served on the Mayor's Taskforce for Child Development, as well as the Susan G. Komen Foundation.

Her most recent notable achievement was management of the Matthew Walker Comprehensive Health Center's million-dollar building project. Though diagnosed with a terminal illness, Michelle's clarity and resolve to ensure continued community healthcare led to the

project's completion. Her leadership resulted in a monumental financial turnaround for the center, and a new state-of-the-art medical, dental and diagnostic facility. She prayed that her life would be extended so she could see the conclusion of this project. After the project's completion in October 2004, she commented that ``[The new center] is one of the most significant professional goals that I've ever accomplished . . . we look forward to using this project as a tool to further serve the community.'' Because of her tremendous resolve, the center is expected to provide health and dental care to more than 20,000 medically underserved Tennesseans each year.

I was fortunate to have been able to work with Michelle over the past few years, and I will truly miss her, as will all of Nashville. She was one of those rare individuals who had a clear and strong vision for what she could accomplish with her life, and she did it. She saw the need in Nashville for a center that could help our community's most vulnerable and she turned the Matthew Walker Comprehensive Health Center into a thriving and vital center that is now recognized nationwide for its excellence. She was a committed, compassionate community leader. And she was a great lady. Her gifts were extraordinary and we are fortunate that her contributions to this community will continue for decades to come.

Michelle Marrs' legacy will live on through her children--Christy and Ivanna--the Matthew Walker Comprehensive Health Center, and the love and compassion she shared with her family, friends and community. On behalf of the Fifth District of Tennessee, I send my deepest condolences to Michelle's family.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the Federal budget deficit is one of the gravest problems that our Nation faces. It is one of the largest it has ever been. It is $412 billion this past year. It is likely to continue at that size for the foreseeable future.

$412 billion is a whole lot of money, but the truth is that the real budget deficit is even higher than that because, due to the Social Security surplus of about $155 billion this last year, that is used by the administration to disguise the true size of the deficit. So that means the true deficit is not $412 billion, even though that is a near record setter. The true deficit this last year was $567 billion.

We have a real problem in America because each annual deficit turns into debt, debt that we have to pay interest on. We have no choice about that because America has never defaulted and will never default on its obligations.

Those interest costs add up. It took the first 204 years of our Nation's history to get us the first $1 trillion in debt, 204 years to do that; but now we add another $1 trillion every 2 or 3 years.

Mr. Speaker, we do that because our Nation is simply not paying its bills today. It is too easy to spend money that we do not have, too easy to spend money that we are borrowing increasingly from dangerous countries like China. We are borrowing $1.3 million a minute, over $1 billion a day; and, Mr. Speaker, that adds up to a terrible debt burden for our children and grandchildren.

We have got to do something about that. It is sad but true that it is unlikely that the Congress this year will even have a budget. We passed one in the House of Representatives and the Senate passed one, but the two are so different they are probably irreconcilable.

Guess what, Mr. Speaker, last year we did not have a budget either. So how is our Nation, the greatest nation in the history of the world, going to proceed without a budget, meanwhile running some of the largest deficits in American history, adding, as I said earlier, $1 trillion to our children's and grandchildren's debt every year or two now?

Well, most Americans are not informed about this, and that is an outrage because what the leadership of this House has done is they eliminated any votes on raising the debt ceiling. That used to be a way that the American public could tell when the debt was being increased dramatically, when we bumped up against that debt ceiling. Now there are few, if any, recorded votes on that. No news to report. It just happens automatically.

Mr. Speaker, everybody talks about spending cuts as a way to get out of the deficit hole. That is a great idea; but, Mr. Speaker, it is unlikely that a body of 435 in this House and 100 in the Senate is going to come up with spending cuts. We need Presidential leadership, and that has been conspicuously lacking for the last 4 or 5 years.

Mr. Speaker, President Bush is the first President in the United States since James Garfield never to have vetoed a bill. Not one single piece of legislation has President Bush vetoed, the first President since Garfield, who served back in 1881; and poor Garfield was only in office for 6 months before he died. We are now in the 5th year of the Bush Presidency, and he has yet to veto a bill.

To give President Bush credit, he says he really needs the line item veto, the special narrower form of veto that would enable him to cut individual programs out of larger bills. That would be a wonderful thing for the President to have, but the Supreme Court has ruled it is unconstitutional. It would take at least 2 or 3 years to pass a constitutional amendment. Meanwhile, we would have another President.

But what the President has not acknowledged is he has got rescission power which is just about as good as the line item veto power; and guess what, just like the real veto, he has never used the rescission power either.

President Clinton used rescission power 163 times, and he won 111 of those cuts; but President Bush, in his 5 years as President, has never asked for a rescission power. Period.

Well, that is an outrage. So not only are we not seeing Presidential leadership on the veto, we are not seeing Presidential leadership regarding rescission power either.

I think the American people need to ask. We want Presidential leadership and he has provided excellent leadership in a number of areas, but regarding our Federal budget deficit, there has been almost no leadership.

We need to start a clock saying when is the President going to finally veto a bill and try to discipline a Congress that likes to spend money too much? When is the President going to rescind spending and start disciplining Congress? The American people deserve to know the answer.

Mr. Chairman, I would like the Record to reflect my views on the horrendous and deliberate deficits our Nation faces--these articles appeared today in Roll Call and last week in the New York Times.

[From the New York Times, Mar. 11, 2005]

Rescission Time in Congress

(By Jim Cooper)

President Bush regularly calls on Congress to restrain

spending. But he has yet to put his pen where his mouth is by

using his veto--a blunt instrument, to be sure, but one that

very few American presidents have failed to wield, especially

during times of high deficits. Mr. Bush says he prefers a

sharper veto power; the ability to cut spending programs

within larger bills. He called for line-item veto power in

his first press conference after his re-election and in his

2006 budget.

But such a statute is not only out of reach--it would

probably require a constitutional amendment--it is also

unnecessary. Why? Because Mr. Bush can already cut individual

programs out of larger legislation with a scalpel that's

almost as sharp as the line-item veto. An obscure law passed

during the Nixon administration gives the president

extraordinary power to stop any discretionary spending. All

he has to do is persuade Republicans on Capitol Hill to go

along.

It's called rescission. Under the Congressional Budget and

Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the president can select any

appropriated Federal program for reduction or elimination by

sending a message to Congress, which then has 45 days to

approve his decision with a simple majority in each house. If

Congress agrees, the president can reshape Federal government

to his liking. If Congress disagrees, or fails to act, the

cut disappears.

This law gives Mr. Bush more power than he has sought for

his battles on trade promotion or new Federal judges. With

it, he can pick his targets, put fast-track pressure on

Congress to respond, and win by gaining a simple majority

approval--in other words, rescission is filibuster-proof.

So why haven't presidents been vigorously using the

Impoundment Act to manage the budget in the last 31 years?

The reason is that different parties usually controlled the

White House and Congress, making large cuts impossible. For

example, President Clinton won 111 of the 163 rescissions he

requested from a divided Congress, but was able to save only

several billion dollars.

Although Republicans now control both the House and Senate,

Mr. Bush has not asked for any rescissions, large or small.

Why has Mr. Bush kept this knife in a dusty drawer,

especially given the staggering deficit, his public stance on

the need to curb spending and his close ties with the

Republican Congressional leadership? Surely he knows how

often Mr. Clinton resorted to it.

Perhaps his unwillingness stems from the knowledge that,

with rescission, Americans know who wielded the knife and

what programs were cut or kept. But to govern is to choose.

If Republicans really want to cut spending and reduce the

deficit, they have more weapons than any political party has

had in decades.

Jim Cooper, Democrat of Tennessee, is a member of the House

Budget Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an extraordinary group of young women from Mt. Juliet High School in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee, who are the 2004-2005 Class AAA Girls Basketball State Champions. The Lady Bears capped off their season by winning the state championship on March 12, 2005, finishing the season with a 37-1 overall record. I am proud of these outstanding young athletes for this great accomplishment.

Winning a state championship in any sport not only takes great athletic ability, but also hard work, dedication and hours of practice. I admire these girls for their commitment to their team, their school and their community.

These student-athletes should be honored not only for the feat of winning the Tennessee State Girls Basketball Championship but for being recognized nationally for their remarkable talent and skill. The Lady Bears finished the 2004-2005 season ranked 10th on the USA Today's Super 25 list, making them one of the top girls basketball teams in the entire country. It goes without saying that this is an incredible and well-deserved honor and I am proud that they have represented their hometown and Tennessee so well.

On behalf of the Fifth Congressional District of Tennessee, I extend my heartiest congratulations to the following members of the Mt. Juliet High School girls basketball team: Alysha Clark, Holly Hudson, Christian Gibson, Sarah Muniz, Casey Pigue, Paige McFarlin, Miaca Bowman, Mandy McGee, Kelley Christian Van Atta, Brittany Mehring, Paige Cutright, Kristen Garton, Nicole Defevers, Hailey Holland and Coaches Chris Fryer and John Simms.

I applaud the tremendous achievements of these exceptional young players and wish them well.

Mr. Speaker, today, the House of Representatives will start its annual debate on the budget, one of the most important debates of the year.

I would urge all of my colleagues to vote against the rule setting up the terms of this debate. Why vote against the rule? Because the Blue Dog Coalition alternative, the amendment which had 12 key procedural reforms to get our Nation off its current drunken borrowing and deficit binge, none of those wise provisions were included for debate.

Why? Nine Republicans on the House Committee on Rules voted against such common-sense terms as, for example, having a cost estimate on every bill or allowing a recorded vote on items that spend more than $50 million. I do not know but it is very important that House Members vote against the rule so that we can have a fairer debate on our budget process and support the reforms in the Blue Dog Coalition.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from South Carolina, who is one of the most able and honorable Members of this body. I also want to congratulate the gentleman for having put together a budget that reaches balance.

The other side talks a good game. They do not produce. Every year the ranking member's budget has a lower deficit than the Republican budget.

My point today is simple: On the floor of this House, there are two pictures and two pictures only: One is George Washington, to my right, and the other one is a gentleman people in the galleries have trouble identifying. Who is he? He is a Frenchman, the Marquis de Lafayette. Why is he here? Because during the American Revolution, they loaned us money to help us beat the British.

There is always a race between the creditors and the citizens. Well, under the Republican budget, the creditors start winning in the year 2009. This is it, the tipping point. In the year 2009, we will be spending more money to service our debts, increasingly to foreigners, than we will be spending on our own citizens on domestic non-defense discretionary spending. That is an outrage. It will be better starting in the year 2009 in terms of domestic government in this country to be a creditor and not a citizen.

And the trend that is being set by the Republican budget just gets worse. Do not take my word for it, listen to the Government Accountability Office. By the year 2040, under present trends, it will take all the revenues of the Federal Government just to pay interest

on our debts. There will be no national defense, there will be no Social Security, there will be no Medicare, there will be no government left. The Republicans have put us on a road to ruin.

One of the speakers recently just said, well, we have a strong defense. That is good. We are borrowing more and more of the money from the Chinese. Who do you want pictured on the wall of the House of Representatives in future years? Do you want the Marquis de Lafayette, or do you want Hu Jintao of China, or Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan, or do you want Tony Blair of Great Britain? Because these creditors have more and more power over this country because we are borrowing more and more of their money.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Tierney amendment. This is a lot of money we are talking about. As the late Everett Dirksen said, a billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you have got some real money.

We are talking about $200 billion. And we all support our warfighters. We support our men and women in uniform, but we should not throw money at any problem. And all this amendment asks is that we copy the Truman Commission where a Democratic Senator investigated a Democratic President. This should not be a partisan issue at all. Both parties should unite.

And I congratulate the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) for his strong work in this worthy effort. Republicans should want a real-time bipartisan look at what is really going on.

I had the good fortune of being in Baghdad last Christmas. Our C-130 was broken, so we spent a little extra time at the Baghdad airport. A shipment came in that our military did not want us to see. But I had my video camera handy, and I took pictures. What was it? Six large pallets, off-loaded from U.S. aircraft, beautifully packaged, you could tell, lots of small boxes on each pallet, very heavy to lift. What was in those boxes? Answer, $1.4 billion, billion with a B as in ``boy,'' $1.4 billion of U.S. currency shipped in allegedly to replenish the Iraqi central bank. Well, I hope and pray that was true. But when our own Paul Bremer says he really cannot account for $9 billion of money, when eyewitnesses

see 300 million in U.S. cash being flown out of the country, allegedly to buy arms for the good guys, you have got to wonder. All we are asking for here is accountability.

And I want to pay special tribute to my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), a leading member of the Blue Dog Coalition. What we want is accountability. We are fiscal and defense hawks, but we need to know where the money goes. The taxpayers of this country deserve no less. This is as far from a partisan issue as you can get. All we want is accountability because catching fraud, waste, and abuse is the most bipartisan of issues. So I congratulate my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), also the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney). This needs to be in the bill because these supplementals, they are becoming a habit, guys. Every year we are going to have a major supplemental. And it is high time that we find out where the money went. Support the Tierney amendment.

Mr. Speaker, this week the House of Representatives will pass a budget for the United States of America, $2.6 trillion. Whatever budget passes this House should include the Blue Dog Coalition's reform measures. These measures have been praised by groups as diverse as the Concord Coalition, the Heritage Foundation, the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, Taxpayers For Common Sense and, Centrists.org.

What is in this package? It is basically a 12-step plan. That is right, a 12-step plan to get our Nation off its drunken deficit binge. We need to take serious measures here such as a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, such as real PAYGO, such as the simple step of requiring we have a cost estimate of every bill that comes before this House.

There is too much unaccountability here. We need to make sure that Members are held accountable. Our deficit is perhaps the gravest national threat that we face. This should be done on a bipartisan basis and whatever passes this House should have the Blue Dog Coalition reform measures in it.

Blue Dog Coalition--Praise for the 12-Step Budget Reform Plan

``The budget reform package introduced by the House Blue

Dog Coalition is a credible, balanced package that offers the

potential for bipartisan agreement on meaningful reforms.

Many of the proposals in the package have bipartisan support

or have received bipartisan support in the past.''--Ed

Lorenzen, Centrists.org

``The Blue Dogs deserve credit for putting out a strong,

serious proposal to restrain runaway spending. Taken together

with the Republican Study Committee's similar proposal and

Administration initiatives, this proposal represent a growing

bipartisan consensus that sanity must and can be restored to

the federal budget process.''--Brian Reidl, Heritage

Foundation

``I'm pleased there seems to be a mounting consensus on

Capitol Hill that spending is out of control and something

must be done. . . . The Blue Dogs have provided 12 ideas to

bring more order to the budget process.''--Tom Schatz,

Citizens Against Government Waste

``[W]ith the Blue Dog Democrats now offering serious ideas

on how to change the course of our fiscal ship, conditions

are ripe to make desperately needed bipartisan repairs to the

faulty rudder that has been steering the budget process into

a sea of red ink . . . Taken as a whole, the Blue Dog

proposal moves the debate over budget reform forward.''--Tad

DeHaven, National Taxpayers Union

``Taxpayers for Common Sense Action applauds the Blue Dog

Coalition's 12-step plan to cure our nation's addiction to

deficits. The first step to overcoming any addiction is to

admit you have a problem. Congress and the President can take

their first strides toward budgetary recovery by enacting

many of these proposals immediately.''--Jill Lancelot,

Taxpayers for Common Sense

Mr. Speaker, President Bush says he wants to restrain spending. But regardless of the budget that the House passes this week, President Bush has never used his two constitutional powers to restrain spending. Number one, the big veto: he has never used it. He is the first President since James Garfield in 1881 never to use the veto. And poor President Garfield was only in office for 6 months. President Bush is now in his fifth year of his Presidency.

Secondly, the little veto: I wrote an article on this in the New York Times last Friday. The rescission power. All President Bush needs is a majority of House and Senate Republicans to support his spending cuts, and he can cut anything in the Federal Government that he wants to. The rescission power is filibuster-proof. He does not need 60 votes in the Senate. He has Fast Track pressure on Congress to respond, but he has never used that little veto power either.

President Clinton used it 163 times. When has President Bush ever used either the big veto power or the little veto power? The American public needs to know.

Mr. Speaker, it is official. Last night, the House Budget Committee passed a budget which will, in a few short years, require us to spend more money on interest payments to bond holders than we spend on domestic government in the United States of America.

Let me be precise. We will be spending more on budget interest to bond holders, many of whom are foreign, than we spend on domestic nondefense discretionary spending in this country. This will happen by the year 2009.

What a tragedy. We are spending more money on bond holders than we are on our own citizens. It took 204 years to have this happen. The other party will not even allow a recorded vote on this issue so that we can see how people stand on that issue.

I urge all of my colleagues to support the Blue Dog reform package. It is tough against the deficit. To some of our Republican friends, if you want to reduce these deficits, get on that bill.