Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to address the ongoing debt ceiling negotiations, or so they're called. The debt crisis currently facing our country is a grave one. Make no mistake, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has called the debt the greatest threat to our national security. Not Iraq, not Afghanistan, not al Qaeda, but our debt.

Since January 2009, $3.7 trillion has been added to the national debt. Currently, our debt stands at $14.3 trillion, and I'm told if you add in the cost, the present day cost of all of the promises that irresponsible people who have stood here before me have made to the American people, that the cost would be over $70 trillion.

Many Americans, including this one, can't even conceptualize that, can't count that high. And that's not their

fault; that's this body's fault. There is a lot of fearmongering going on by people who want us to spend more. They have seen these tactics work in the past--bank bailouts, massive spending bills.

Even if the calamity forecast were to come to pass, it doesn't change the fact that the debt crisis we face is our fiscal sin. Our generation and generations before ours are responsible for it; not my kids, not your kids, and not our grandchildren. If addressing it hurts in the short term, then I say so be it.

I reject the idea that we would pass this mess on to our kids for some short-term economic or political gain. That is one of the most piggish ideas I've ever heard, and it runs counter to the spirit that helped make this Nation great, an exceptional Nation. We own this mess. If we have to suffer a little bit in the short term to right our fiscal house in the long term, that's our duty, and it's our duty to fix it. It is debt that is hurting the economy and, don't forget, the misguided, big-government economic ideas that have been implemented over the last 2\1/2\ years.

These debt ceiling negotiations are a great opportunity to enact monumental reform within the Federal Government, making the future brighter for all Americans, so the next 2 weeks, my colleagues, are critical. We can do it, if we want to, in a bipartisan fashion. We must seize the opportunity. It is more important that we craft a deal that gets it right for the sake of our children and grandchildren than we implement a false fix driven by short-term thinking. Getting it right means enacting permanent and structural reforms to the way Washington spends. Raising taxes is not necessary and would only hurt the economy. Our government doesn't tax too little. Our government spends too much.

By ``permanent and structural,'' I mean a balanced budget amendment. A balanced budget amendment would be hard for a future Congress or a future President to change, and it would force the necessary things that cause us to live within our means again. In order to raise the debt ceiling, the price for that concession must be the passage of permanent and structural reforms like the balanced budget amendment-- period. There is no additional negotiation. There is no additional request. The request is to raise the debt ceiling $2 trillion. Okay. Let's do it, but if we do it, let's make sure it never has to be done again. The only way to do that is through permanent and structural reforms like a balanced budget amendment. If the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling are as severe as some suggest, surely we can find the common ground necessary for a deal that forces our government to balance its budget like American families do every month.

I'm excited. Rarely does a legislative body have a chance to do something so monumental and so monumentally great. This would be among the most significant reforms in our Nation's history. I don't know that an opportunity to enact a balanced budget amendment will be within our reach again for a very long time.

I do know I've only been around for 6 months on this floor, and no matter how long I or others stay, I think we will look back on the next 3 weeks as one of the best opportunities we will have ever had for making things better for our future, for our posterity. That ultimately is how we should look at every vote we take on this floor, not how it will benefit us in the here and now, but how it will benefit our children's chances to inherit what we did--the greatest, most exceptional Nation the world has ever known. I didn't come here to vote for us in the here and now. I came here to vote for our future.

Now is the time for bold, decisive action. Now is the time for a balanced budget amendment. Nothing short of the future of our children and grandchildren is at stake.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute an exceptional Hoosier, Thomas A. Hargett. Sadly, we lost Tom on June 27. I wish to express my condolences, thoughts and prayers to his family. We stood side by side fighting the ``bad guys''. He was my friend.

As a man of faith, I believe we were put on this earth to love one another and to make the best of the gifts our Lord has provided. We are all blessed to live in a country that allows us to experience freedom and the opportunity to succeed. Tom worked hard to represent his clients and help them recover money lost to unscrupulous stockbrokers, fraud and negligence.

Tom was also dedicated to community service and should be commended for all he did. He served on the Board of Directors, most recently as the Vice President, since 2003 of the Indiana Children's Wish Fund, granting wishes to children diagnosed with life-threatening illnesses. He was the President of the Sigma Nu Housing Corporation and in 2010 was awarded the Herman B. Wells Alumni Leadership Award and inducted into the Sigma Nu Beta Eta Chapter's Hall of Honor. Tom also served on the Board of Directors of the White Star Endowment, a wonderful organization that grants scholarships for academic' excellence and financial need to Indiana University students.

For all he did for the community, his most favorite activity was spending time with his wife, Denise, and their beautiful children Isaac and Erin. I would like to thank his family for sharing Tom with us. For all the great things he did, he will be truly missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a true model Hoosier and American upon his retirement.

For nearly 40 years, Mr. Robert Duncan has been the backbone of aviation law in Indiana. As a leader in the aviation community, Mr. Duncan has helped author, advocated for and implemented the most innovative aviation policy in the country for the State of Indiana and the Indianapolis Airport Authority (IAA). Mr. Duncan has played a pivotal role in the growth of the Indianapolis Airport, and ultimately, central Indiana and the country. The special attention Mr. Duncan has paid to successfully balancing the growth of our Indiana's main International Airport, with the protection of the rights of private citizens a high priority, is a model for economic growth and personal freedom in any industry. His efforts are a part of Indiana's Comeback story.

More specifically, Mr. Duncan was the lead negotiator on all central Indiana aviation-related land acquisition during his years of service to Indiana. Notably, the expansion of the airport, as well as land acquisitions for the smaller community airports nearby, has enabled the growth that the IAA has contributed to the Hoosier state. In addition, Mr. Duncan was directly responsible for the placement of a United States Postal Service hub with the IAA. With the establishment of this hub, it laid the groundwork that would attract other private sector package carriers and logistics companies that now operate in Indianapolis and nearby communities. The economic impact these expansions have had is immeasurable. I see the fruits of Bob's efforts everyday in West Central Indiana.

With a long list of accolades for his years of leadership, Mr. Duncan has been named the Indiana Aviation Man of the Year, as well as receiving a Special Recognition Award from the Aviation Association of Indiana. Throughout his career, Mr. Duncan has made it a habit to assist other airports with legal matters, at no cost, aiding growth and demonstrating the dedication and passion he has with the aviation community throughout the state, to the benefit of all Hoosiers and travelers to and from our state.

Mr. Duncan also routinely volunteers his time for charitable efforts, both in aviation and in his local community. From his efforts with the Brownsburg Public Library to his coaching of basketball and softball, Mr. Duncan has the heart of a true public servant. Additionally, Mr. Duncan has routinely flown charitable Angel Flights throughout the country, to aide those in need of transportation for medical treatment without the means to travel. I am particularly familiar with this type of program, and Bob and I have piloted several Angel Flights together.

As a graduate of Hanover College and Indiana University's School of Law, Bob contributes back to the education of others interested in aviation and aviation law. Bob is a supervising private flight instructor, as well as an adjunct professor in aviation law at Indiana University's School of Law, Indianapolis.

Hoosiers especially, and Americans, are lucky to have benefited from the years of dedicated service in planning and abundant expertise provided by Mr. Duncan for nearly four decades. His volunteerism is an added classic Hoosier trait. Bob has exemplified the essence of Hoosier values with his commonsense leadership and dedication to the betterment of our great state. For his efforts and ethics, I am proud to commend this Hoosier, Robert Duncan, upon his pending retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Sarah Zabel, one of my constituents and I am proud to say one of this year's 141 U.S. Presidential Scholars.

Sarah is one of the top students in her graduating class at Brownsburg High School in Brownsburg, Indiana, while balancing work and numerous extracurricular activities. She is a member of the Girl's Varsity Tennis Team and writes for the Y-Press, the youth news bureau of the Indianapolis Star. Sarah also sings in Starlight Voices, a competitive women's choir. She has held several leadership positions within her community, including Vice President of the National Honor Society, copy editor of Brownsburg High School's student newspaper, and was a participant in the National Young Leaders Conference. It is clear, Sarah succeeds not only in the classroom, but as an active member of her community. In Sarah's free time, she tutors second grade students, serves food for Beggars for the Poor, and collects non- perishable goods for local food pantries.

I am proud to honor Sarah Zabel in recognition of all her achievements, admirable leadership, and superior contributions to her local community. As she heads to Xavier University in the fall, I wish her the best of luck for a bright and successful future.

Offered By: Mr. Rokita

Amendment No. 47: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Rokita

Amendment No. 48: At the end of the bill (before the short

title) insert the following:

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama and I want to thank the minority party. It is 12:10 by the clock of the House, and I know this is a long process. We have more to do tomorrow. I appreciate all parties allowing the House to work its will.

I rise to offer an amendment tonight on behalf of the Republican Study Committee and myself to reduce the overall funding levels contained in the Homeland Security bill by 10 percent, with the exception of funds for ensuring the security of our Nation's borders. This would save, Mr. Chairman, $2.5 billion.

Our country is on the brink of a fiscal crisis. As the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has stated repeatedly, our debt is the greatest threat to our national security. Not citizens going through our airports, not what appears to be three wars now we have involved ourselves in; our debt is the greatest threat to our national security.

We need to ensure that our tax dollars are spent wisely and efficiently, especially when it comes to protecting our Nation. Unfortunately, the Department of Homeland Security is not an exception when it comes to examples of government waste. The Department of Homeland Security must focus its resources more effectively. In their short history they have become inherently wasteful, creating programs that do not make our Nation any more secure. And they're not unlike any bureaucracy that's come before it.

A recent audit by the Defense Contract Audit Agency found 32 contracts collectively worth $34.3 billion that have been plagued by waste, abuse, or mismanagement from 2001 through 2006. If we pass this amendment and force an across the board cut, DHS will be forced to analyze its programs more effectively and become a more efficient agency as a result.

Mr. Chairman, I don't speak tonight out of mere opinion. I speak tonight out of experience. You see, I used to run a bureaucracy. I used to run a bureaucracy that ran on 1987 dollars, unadjusted for inflation. And we had good results. In my former securities division alone, because of great people, we got 300 years of jail time awarded and over $52 million of restitution.

The government can do more with less on all levels, and that includes the Department of Homeland Security. DHS funding needs to be reconfigured, focusing on protecting targets that are legitimate terrorist threats, rather than disbursing funds on a per capita basis. That's a wasteful, inefficient, and ineffective way to do things. Secondly, DHS must redefine its mission and focus on what its original purpose was: protecting the homeland from terrorist attacks.

As we approach its 10th anniversary, no longer does DHS focus solely on homeland security. They focus on mass casualty events, totally unrelated to terrorism, like natural disasters. Firefighter and cops funding, once funded locally on the State and local level, is funded through grants by the Federal Government. And while no Member of this body will contend they are not vital to our communities, these programs that Federal tax dollars are paying for are not Federal responsibility under our Constitution, and for a very good reason.

We need to start making tough decisions, Mr. Chairman. This amendment builds upon the work of the Appropriations Committee in reducing spending, but I believe it can go further.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight to offer an amendment that would safeguard America's air travel by restricting funding in this bill for any collective bargaining by the Transportation Security Administration.

Recently, President Obama's administration announced a decision to allow the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, the unions, to enter into collective bargaining agreements. This would restrict our ability to meet ever-changing dangers and will add to Federal spending, which in our time of Federal deficits would be irresponsible.

Since the creation of TSA 10 years ago, its unions have been prohibited from collective bargaining and for good reason. This ban comes from former TSA Administrator Loy determining that collective bargaining agreements would hamper the critical nature of TSA agents' national security responsibilities.

TSA agents are no different than FBI, CIA and Secret Service agents. We do not negotiate collective bargaining agreements with security personnel, and TSA clearly falls, Mr. Chairman, within that category. We witnessed the necessary flexibility of the TSA.

In 2006 after a British airliner bombing plot was discovered, TSA was able to overhaul its policies within 12 hours. If unionization occurs, TSA will be less flexible and less efficient in doing their business to protect America.

Contracts and demands of collective bargaining are complex and they are cumbersome. They are less flexible than is needed in national security situations. The union demands will unquestionably make our transportation security more costly and less efficient, and certainly let's not ignore the fact that the recourse that citizens have when they are mistreated, illegally groped or otherwise not served will be reduced if it has not been made nonexistent with a union.

I will work to ensure that collective bargaining does not impact the safety of any American travelers or needlessly subjects our rights or personal space to a union or its leaders.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mr. Rokita

Amendment No. 47: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Rokita

Amendment No. 48: At the end of the bill (before the short

title) insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate an important member of Indiana's State Excise Police.

Lieutenant Terry Bauer has served the Indiana State Excise Police with distinction, integrity, and dedication for over 37 years. He proudly holds the record for the longest serving officer in ISEP's history. Throughout those years, he consistently demonstrated the highest standards of outstanding leadership and public service. He left the ISEP on April 30th of this year and is excited to begin a new chapter of his life.

Lieutenant Bauer served as the President of the Indiana State Excise Police Officers Association. In this role, he successfully lobbied the Indiana General Assembly for full unrestricted police powers and won. This is now referred to as the greatest moment in history for the ISEP and its officers. It gave them new law enforcement opportunities and a new level of respect as a state law enforcement agency.

I would like to thank his family: his wife Elaine, sons Chris and Brian and their wives Christa and Heather, and his grandson Collin, for so selflessly supporting Lieutenant Bauer in his long and accomplished career. I am proud to honor Lieutenant Bauer in recognition of his exemplary leadership and outstanding contributions to the ISEP.

I thank my friend from Arkansas, Tim Griffin. I know we are going to talk about Medicare, and we are going to talk about the debt ceiling, but I want to thank you for rising to address what has happened on the House floor this very last hour, because what you say is absolutely the truth. And if we have to, my friend, the gentleman from Arkansas, as new Members keep speaking truth to power, then we will do that.

But the fact of the matter is every time, every time the government confiscates the property of the American people, which is their money, you are exactly right, you take away their freedom, their property, their ability to invest that dollar as they see fit. And when that private sector money is in the hands of a small business or a large business, an ice cream shop or an oil company, they have a better opportunity and know better what to do with that dollar in terms of investment, in terms of growing the government, than any government bureaucrat or anyone on the floor of the House ever can.

I don't understand, Mr. Speaker, why every other industrialized nation on the face of this Earth understands that when you pull a lump of coal from the ground, when you take some oil from the ground, when you exploit in the best sense of that word our natural resources, you create wealth.

You raise the standard of living for all involved. Why is one party in this country so masochistic that they can't understand that?

Thank you for your time.

Thank you. I want to thank the gentleman from Arkansas. I want to associate my comments with the ones just made by the gentleman from Arizona. They're excellent. I think they accurately stated, along with the other gentleman from Arkansas, why we're here as new Members: to grow this economy, make this in the 21st century the best place on Earth to grow a family, to grow jobs, to grow a business.

But you can't have that discussion if we're also not going to talk about how

big this government is, how much bigger it's going to get and who has to pay for it. The ``who has to pay for it,'' my good friend, is not necessarily us. It's our kids and our grandkids who are simply going to be left with the tab so that some of us can have more on our plates now. These were reckless promises made by politicians who came before us on this very floor, on that other floor and all around this town. The simple fact of the matter is they can't possibly be paid for.

What I'd like to do, as I continue to work with you on the floor tonight and rise again a little bit later, is, as a member of the Budget Committee, simply put on the floor some facts and figures so that we understand where we are as we go about talking of solutions.

We are $14 trillion, rounding, in debt right now--this hour, this day. If you look out into the future and you see our new red menace, the tidal wave of debt that is about to come crashing down on us, the total bill is nearly $100 trillion. The total cost year over year of waiting, of kicking that can down the road, as we've heard tonight, a road that's quickly coming to an end, is over $12 trillion. It's more expensive. Let's break it down, because I will be the first to admit on the floor of the House here tonight, sir, that I can't count to $1 trillion. I can't count that high. I can't comprehend what $1 trillion means, not to mention $14 trillion, not to mention $100 trillion.

$1 trillion is one thousand billion. $1 billion is one thousand million. Well now, maybe we're getting somewhere in breaking it down.

Let's break it down by hour. In the hour we're spending in talking with the American people about this serious problem, this country will borrow in this hour over $170 million--just in this hour. For every dollar this Federal Government spends, we are borrowing 42 cents of it.

Let's put it in terms of days. We've heard about Tax Day, that day every year when we find that Americans can finally keep what they earn, keep their own property and start working for themselves; but we also have a Debt Day now. Debt Day this year is July 27. Every day this Federal Government operates on and after July 27 it is operating on borrowed money.

Let's put it in terms of speed. Let's say we're driving down a highway and our historical debt is a car. It would be going down that highway at historical speeds of 65 miles an hour, and that's probably bad enough if the car is debt, but it has gotten a lot worse recently. Let's say there is another car coming up in our rear view mirror and that we look and it's coming up fast. Maybe the license plate reads-- but we may not be able to read it--``hope and change,'' and it's coming up and it zooms right by us. How fast, sir, do we think that car had been going if the debt car that we'd historically been riding in had already been going 65 miles an hour? Would it be 70? 100? No. That car that just passed us by, that new debt car that we're currently spending on, is going over 7,000 miles an hour.

That's the challenge we're up against, and the only help that we've gotten from the other side in tackling this challenge is name-calling and demagoguery. It's old tactics. Yet I'm hopeful, sir. I'm hopeful because, every day that we get to talk about this and every day over the last couple of years that we've gotten to talk about this, we are educating our fellow citizens more. We are doing a great job. We are winning the argument. I think, at this time, we are ready to tackle this debt problem if we talk honestly and directly with the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute an exceptional Hoosier, William A. Cook. Sadly, we lost Bill on April 15. I wish to express my condolences to his family who knew him as husband, father, and grandfather.

To Indiana, Bill's leadership was a shining example of the type of leadership everyone should strive to achieve. Marked by common sense, his leadership embodied the qualities emblazoned in the Hoosier spirit. Bill's focus on service above self; both in building great businesses and in improving our community has left us all a better place to live, work, and raise a family.

As a man of faith, I believe we were put on this earth to love one another and to make the best of the gifts our Lord has provided. We are all blessed to live in a country that allows us to experience freedom and the opportunity to succeed. When I look at the life story of a man who built a business empire that began in a spare bedroom in an apartment, employed thousands around the globe, and provided life saving, and life-altering technology to millions more, all I can say is Amen. Well done.

Bill Cook exemplified the American dream in every way. The amazing narrative of his life will live on, not only through the Cook Group and the many companies that Bill created, but through his family and through the incalculable number of Hoosiers he helped through the years. I would like to thank his family for sharing Bill with us. We are a community that will not soon forget him.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The ``people's budget''? This budget, if enacted, would end this country as we know it. This budget increases spending, Mr. Chairman, by $13 trillion over 10 years. It takes $16 trillion more from the American people over 10 years through the biggest tax increase this country has ever seen. It increases our debt $3.5 trillion over 10 years.

This isn't the people's budget. This country was founded on equal opportunity for everyone, not equal outcome. History is littered with countries and nations that have failed because they tried for equal outcome.

This country remains the greatest Nation the world has ever seen because we pride ourselves and enforce equal opportunity.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds.

There has been a lot of talk about budgets being moral instruments. The budget that we've proposed through the Budget Committee, the Ryan budget, is a responsible budget. And let me say, Mr. Chairman, what is immoral is balancing these choices on the backs of our children and grandchildren, Americans who haven't even been born yet. That's what's immoral.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney).

Will the gentleman yield?

The budget proposed and voted on by the committee--

Do you want me to answer the question or not?

With responsible, gradual reforms to the drivers of our debt, like Medicare and Social Security, the Ryan budget will balance.

Mr. Chairman, I see where the gentleman from Minnesota is going with his question, and I yield myself 10 seconds just to answer it.

He claims responsibility in this budget. The only way they can possibly balance, and I don't agree that they will balance in that time, is by drastically raising taxes on every American. That's not responsibility because it doesn't pose a choice. That is the definition of irresponsibility, Mr. Chairman.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

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

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time on both sides?

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ribble).

I reserve the balance of my time.

In closing, I would like to recall the words of the gentleman from South Carolina, who spoke about the honesty of this proposed amendment.

I think it was an appropriate thing to say. This is an honest proposal. I believe that the proponents of this amendment believe everything that's in the amendment as a possible solution--but honesty, Mr. Chairman, does not equal responsibility.

This isn't the people's budget that is being proposed. It is the ``blank check'' budget. You see, it doesn't force any choices. It spends $13 trillion over 10 years. It taxes the American people. It has the Federal Government confiscate from the American people an additional $16 trillion over 10 years. That's not forcing choices. That's not being responsible. Every family in this Nation understands, when they prepare their budgets, they have to make choices. There are different priorities. This just opens up by fiat the right of the Federal Government to dip into the wallets of every American.

I heard a lot about tax cuts for the rich, Mr. Chairman. I want to be clear that the budget that came out of the Budget Committee calls for revenue-neutral tax reform. We are motivated by the same reform principles that are in the President's fiscal commission: to broaden the tax base and to lower tax rates for everybody.

I was looking at some statistics. The bottom 50 percent of taxpayers pays less than 3 percent of the income taxes. In fact, 47 percent of individuals pay no Federal income tax whatsoever.

Our idea is tax neutral. It's revenue neutral. It lowers the tax rates for everybody. It makes all of us pay something, and it doesn't give tax cuts to the rich. We are planning to take away the loopholes so that those who are better off than we are can't take advantage of high-priced lobbyists.

I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this proposed amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this budget amendment.

As a member of the Budget Committee, I also support the Ryan budget. Both these budget proposals are steps in the right direction. They make reforms that are needed. They are honest proposals. They are not trying to demagog, they are not trying to fear-monger, they are not trying to fib to the American people.

We have got to address, Mr. Chairman, the drivers of our debt. We could have no Defense Department. I could work for free; our staffs can work for free. We can get rid of 167 agencies, and we still wouldn't get rid of this debt.

Our debt is driven by these programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And the reason is because reckless politicians who came before this new Member made promises that can't possibly be kept. We are here to tell the truth, Mr. Chairman.

These budgets do this job gradually, they do it humanely, and they allow people to prepare so that these programs can be saved for my kids and our grandkids.

Mr. Chairman, where the President has failed to lead and be honest with us, we've had the courage to tell the truth about America's debt crisis. And we've proposed honest solutions required to fix it.

As a new Member of Congress, I have already learned that the rules in Washington are stacked in favor of people who want to spend more money. In contrast, in Indiana, we have a balanced budget, we have a AAA bond rating, and we have not raised taxes because we know taxes are not the problem.

The problem is, Mr. Chair, our colleagues who continue to push for more government spending knowing that our debt is over $14 trillion and growing. And they haven't offered one alternative except to confiscate more of the people's money.

They have tried to scare a lot of people. But this time, Mr. Chairman, I don't think the people are buying it. As you can see from this chart, our reliance on foreign countries to supply our reckless spending is growing dramatically over the past decades to where nearly half of the debt we owe as a country we owe to foreign countries, China being the best.

In fact, Mr. Chairman, China can buy three Joint Strike Fighters every week for the money we pay them in interest for the money they loan us and still have $50 million left over. Eventually, they and other countries are going to stop loaning us money or make us pay more to borrow. And as Treasury rates increase, rates on mortgages, credit cards and car loans are soon going to follow. We are no longer kicking the can down the road; we're kicking it off a cliff.

This budget addresses the real drivers of our debt: Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. In 1970, these kinds of entitlements consumed 31 percent of our budget. Today they are nearly 60 percent, and they continue to grow. In just a few decades when our kids are raising their children, literally every single dollar this government takes in revenue will go towards paying these entitlement programs. This budget makes the changes necessary to save these programs so that they're around for my kids and your grandchildren.

I know a little about government agencies--I used to run one. One that had no more employees in 2010 than it did in the early '80s. But, since the President took office, he has added 155,000 new bureaucrats. Spending on government agencies has increased 84 percent in just the last few years.

This budget stops us from spending money we do not have. It brings spending back to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels and shrinks the federal bureaucrats by 10 percent over the next three years. It also takes the ideas of the Fiscal Commission and the Government Accountability Office and eliminates over $100 billion in wasteful spending on dozens of duplicative federal programs. Money we don't take from the American people, they will spend much wiser and create jobs along the way. Americans are finally getting an honest and fact-based budget that has eluded them for years.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

Madam Chair, I rise tonight to also talk a little bit about the size and the scope and the number of employees that this Federal Government has. Earlier tonight, I talked about the State from which I come, Indiana--a AAA bond rating, not raising taxes on anybody, and a budget that year after year has been in the black.

As Secretary of State for Indiana for the last 8 years, I had operated a bureaucracy, and I know a little bit about them. What we had in Indiana, at least in the Secretary of State's office, was a pretty darned good one. We had no more employees in the Indiana Secretary of State's office than we did in the early '80s, and we were running on a 1987 budget, unadjusted for inflation.

I can tell by the reaction of some of the Members here in the House tonight that it's one of derision. It's one of scoffing. It can be done. The States know how to do it. Let's look to them.

In contrast to Indiana, what do we see here at the Federal level? We see 155,000 more bureaucrats than just a few years ago, an 80-plus- percent increase in the size and scope of this Federal Government, Madam Chairman--and that's just the personnel. We can have cuts in each of these departments. Every bureaucrat we don't hire after one retires will cause a 10 percent decrease in the Federal workforce over just a few years. That's responsible governing, especially when you're talking about a $14 trillion debt--$1 trillion year after year deficits.

As the previous Republican speaker pointed out, my friend Todd Young, it's just getting worse. The red menace is upon us, and it's the red ink produced in this Federal Government, right here from the well of this House, to begin with. The Ryan proposal that came out of the Budget Committee addresses this in a responsible manner. The smaller we make this Federal Government, the more the private sector grows. It's correlational. It's definitional.

I urge my colleagues to pass this budget proposal, the Ryan proposal.