[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MEMBERS' DAY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 8, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-23
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Budget
Available on the Internet:
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
committee.action?chamber=house&committee=budget
_____
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
73-369 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin, Chairman
SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland,
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho Ranking Minority Member
JOHN CAMPBELL, California ALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
KEN CALVERT, California MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
TOM COLE, Oklahoma EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
TOM PRICE, Georgia BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
TOM McCLINTOCK, California JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah BILL PASCRELL, Jr., New Jersey
MARLIN A. STUTZMAN, Indiana MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma TIM RYAN, Ohio
DIANE BLACK, Tennessee DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin
BILL FLORES, Texas KATHY CASTOR, Florida
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina HEATH SHULER, North Carolina
TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas KAREN BASS, California
TODD C. YOUNG, Indiana SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan
TODD ROKITA, Indiana
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire
ROB WOODALL, Georgia
Professional Staff
Austin Smythe, Staff Director
Thomas S. Kahn, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
Page
Hearing held in Washington, DC, March 8, 2012.................... 1
Hon. Peter Welch, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Vermont................................................. 2
Prepared statement of.................................... 3
Hon. Louie Gohmert, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas............................................. 4
Hon. Jason Altmire, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Pennsylvania...................................... 6
Prepared statement of.................................... 6
Hon. Robert J. Dold, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Illinois.......................................... 8
Prepared statement of.................................... 9
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., a Representative in
Congress from the State of Georgia......................... 11
Prepared statement of.................................... 12
Hon. Colleen Hanabusa, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Hawaii............................................ 12
Prepared statement of.................................... 14
Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Tennessee......................................... 15
Prepared statement of.................................... 16
Hon. Judy Chu, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California................................................. 17
Prepared statement of.................................... 19
Hon. Gene Green, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Texas................................................... 27
Prepared statement of.................................... 29
Hon. Richard B. Nugent, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida........................................... 30
Prepared statement of.................................... 31
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Washington.............................................. 31
Prepared statement of.................................... 32
Hon. Joe Courtney, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Connecticut....................................... 34
Prepared statement of.................................... 35
Hon. Donna M. Christensen, a Delegate in Congress from the
U.S. Virgin Islands........................................ 38
Prepared statement of.................................... 40
Hon. Scott E. Rigell, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia.......................................... 43
Prepared statement of.................................... 44
Hon. Laura Richardson, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California........................................ 46
Prepared statement of.................................... 47
Hon. Randall M. Hultgren, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Illinois...................................... 52
Prepared statement of.................................... 54
Hon. William L. Owens, a Representative in Congress from the
State of New York.......................................... 56
Prepared statement of.................................... 57
Hon. Charles J. ``Chuck'' Fleischmann, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Tennessee....................... 58
Prepared statement of.................................... 59
Hon. Martha Roby, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Alabama................................................. 60
Prepared statement of.................................... 62
Hon. Michael C. Burgess, M.D., a Representative in Congress
from the State of Texas.................................... 63
Prepared statement of.................................... 65
Hon. Al Green, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Texas...................................................... 65
Prepared statement of.................................... 67
Hon. Steny Hoyer, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Maryland................................................ 69
Prepared statement of.................................... 70
Hon. Dave Loebsack, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Iowa.............................................. 72
Prepared statement of.................................... 74
Hon. Brian Higgins, a Representative in Congress from the
State of New York.......................................... 75
Prepared statement of.................................... 76
Hon. Mark S. Critz, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Pennsylvania...................................... 77
Prepared statement of.................................... 78
Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Texas......................................... 80
Prepared statement of.................................... 82
Hon. Keith Ellison, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Minnesota......................................... 88
Prepared statement of.................................... 90
Hon. William R. Keating, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Massachusetts................................. 91
Prepared statement of.................................... 93
Hon. Hansen Clarke, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Michigan.......................................... 95
Prepared statement of.................................... 96
Hon. Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Virginia...................................... 98
Prepared statement of.................................... 98
Hon. Bill Posey, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida................................................. 100
Prepared statement of.................................... 102
Hon. David N. Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Rhode Island.................................. 103
Prepared statement of.................................... 105
Hon. Janice D. Schakowsky, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Illinois...................................... 106
Prepared statement of.................................... 108
Hon. Steven M. Palazzo, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Mississippi....................................... 109
Prepared statement of.................................... 110
Hon. Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, prepared statement of....................... 114
Hon. Mike Coffman, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Colorado, prepared statement of................... 116
Hon. Bob Goodlatte, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia, prepared statement of................... 116
Hon. Janice Hahn, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, prepared statement of....................... 117
Hon. James R. Langevin, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Rhode Island, prepared statement of............... 118
Hon. John Lewis, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Georgia, prepared statement of.......................... 119
Hon. John L. Mica, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida, prepared statement of.................... 122
Hon. Cedric L. Richmond, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Louisiana, prepared statement of.............. 123
Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, a Delegate in Congress
from the Northern Mariana Islands, prepared statement of... 124
Hon. Robert T. Schilling, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Illinois, prepared statement of............... 125
Hon. Kurt Schrader, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, prepared statement of..................... 126
Hon. Timothy J. Walz, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Minnesota, prepared statement of.................. 127
MEMBERS' DAY
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2012
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Budget,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room
210, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jason Chaffetz,
presiding.
Present: Representatives Chaffetz, Stutzman, Lankford, Van
Hollen, Blumenauer, Honda, Ryan of Ohio, Castor, Bass, and
Bonamici.
Mr. Chaffetz. The hearing will come to order. Good morning,
and welcome to the Budget Committee Member's Day hearing.
Before we begin, it looks like we are scheduled to have votes
later this morning, so I ask unanimous consent that, consistent
with Clause 4 of House Rule 16, the chairman will be authorized
to declare a recess at any time, without objection, the request
is agreed to.
This is a hearing we hold every year from our colleagues
about their views on the budget. This hearing is directed by
Section 301(e1) of the Budget Act, and its intent is to bring
about a forum in which members can relay their priorities for
their district, their state, and indeed, for the country. We
are pleased to have a diverse group of members from both sides
of the aisle, and we look forward to receiving their testimony.
Before we begin, I would like to turn it over to my
colleague, Mr. Van Hollen, the ranking member of this
committee, for any comments that he might have.
Mr. Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let we welcome the
members who are here on our first panel; and let me say that we
look forward to your testimony and also the testimony from our
colleagues throughout the day. I think we all understand that
at the end of the day, if we are going to put this budget on a
sustainable course, we are going to have to come together and
overcome the differences and forge some compromises. Hopefully
today will bring some good ideas along those lines. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. I would remind members that they
have been allocated five minutes, and the essence of time, and
the number of members that we have coming before the committee
today, we would ask that you keep your commitments to five
minutes and that we will submit, obviously, your entire written
comments into the record.
Additionally, members of the committee will be permitted to
question the witnesses following their statements, but out of
consideration for our colleagues time, and to expedite today's
proceedings, I ask that you please keep your comments brief.
I would now like to call upon our first witness today, the
gentleman from Vermont, Mr. Welch, for five minutes.
STATEMENT HON. PETER WELCH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF VERMONT
Mr. Welch. Okay, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Mr.
Ranking Member. This federal budget, as you know, is not an
abstract document, it is something that affects people every
day in their lives. I want to talk about three Vermonters,
where the decisions that this Congress makes is going to have a
real impact on their future.
Roger in Rutland heats his home with fuel oil. Prices are
skyrocketing, he cannot pay those bills. He lives alone in a
very modest home, but at age 70, tough as he is, it is tough to
split wood. The $400 he received from the low-income heating
assistance program, and that is all he is going to get, is not
going to get him through the winter. LIHEAP is a vital lifeline
that ensures that Americans and Vermonters like Roger can try
to make it from one end of the winter to the other. They do not
have any control over the price of fuel, they do not have any
control over the weather.
In Vermont, although 76,000 households are eligible for
LIHEAP, only 46,000 receive modest help; yet, in spite of
record high demand, the administration in its proposal, has
suggested slashing LIHEAP funding by $2.1 billion. We should,
and can, do better and I urge the committee to fund LIHEAP at
$7.1 billion a year so that folks do not get cold in the
winter.
Second, rising gas prices: One of the factors in rising gas
prices is Wall Street speculation. A Goldman Sachs study
indicated that $23 on the price of a barrel oil is attributable
to Wall Street speculation, not supply and demand. That futures
market has been flipped upside down from 80 percent end users
buying the product, fuel dealers, airlines, and 20 percent
market makers, speculators to 80 percent speculators, 20
percent end users. That $23 a barrel translates into 56 cents
on a gallon of gas, or $15 when you fill up your pick-up.
We have to fund the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to
be the cop on the beat and make sure that that futures market
works on behalf of businesses and works on behalf of consumers
who need help. Last year's budget, the consumer cop on the
beat, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission budget was cut
33 percent. It makes no sense, I urge the committee to fully
fund it.
Finally, mortgage refinancing: Ashley from Bondville is a
Vermonter who is out of work, but has been current on her
mortgage. She has made every single payment, yet she is unable
to refinance. We have a proposal from the president to allow
for folks who are current on their mortgage to refinance their
mortgage; we need to make certain that whatever resources are
required to implement that program, and this is not having the
government pay the mortgage of Ashley, she is doing that, but
it is a program to allow her to get the benefit of a lower rate
of interest, now that we have record low interest rates.
So Mr. Chairman, these choices we make in the budget do
reflect our priorities, and as we come to grips with the
struggling economy, we need to get a handle on federal debt. We
do have tough choices, but some of these choices are
straightforward and absolutely essential for us to make. We
should not let people freeze in their home; we should not let
speculators reach in the pocket of consumers and small
businesses; and we should let folks who are paying their
mortgage refinance their mortgage. Thank you very much, I yield
back.
[The prepared statement of Peter Welch follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter Welch, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Vermont
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and Members of the
Committee: The federal budget is not an abstract document. It affects
the everyday lives of all Americans.
And it should reflect the priorities and values of our country,
especially in this difficult economy.
For many Vermonters, the decisions made in the federal budget
process will make a difference in whether they will be able to heat
their homes, fill their gas tanks, or pay their mortgages.
1. liheap
Take Roger from Rutland, Vermont. He heats his home with fuel oil
and, with prices skyrocketing, he can no longer afford to fill his fuel
tank.
Roger lives alone in a very modest home. But at the age of 70, he
is too old to split wood.
The $400 he has received in fuel assistance will not get him
through the winter. He has exhausted all other means.
LIHEAP is a vital lifeline that ensures Americans like Roger don't
have to choose between heating their home, putting a meal on the table,
or paying for their medications.
With a backdrop of rising fuel prices and declining incomes, the
last increase in LIHEAP funding was in 2005.
In Vermont, although 76,000 households are eligible for LIHEAP
assistance, only 46,000 households receive help
In spite of record high demand, the Administration has proposed
slashing LIHEAP funding by $2.1 billion
We can do better. We should be increasing LIHEAP funding, not
slashing it.
I urge the committee to fund LIHEAP at $7.1 billion per year so it
can help those who need it most
2. rising gas prices
The rising cost of gasoline is also squeezing the budget of rural
Vermonters.
Judy from Fairfax, Vermont drives a great distance to and from
work.
Skyrocketing gas prices, due in part to Wall Street speculation,
are crimping her budget and household budgets across the country.
Gas prices nationally have increased over 30 cents per gallon in
the last month alone.
This run up in prices comes at a time of the lowest demand for gas
demand in 15 years and the highest domestic oil production in eight
years.
Something doesn't add up.
Wall Street speculators are rolling their dice yet again and
driving up the price of oil and gasoline at the expense of consumers.
A Goldman Sachs analysis revealed that oil speculation adds a
``speculative premium'' of more than $23 per barrel of oil.
That $23 ``premium'' translates to a 56 cent per gallon at the gas
pump.
As gas prices continue to rise, Judy can't afford to fill her gas
tank to get to work.
Speculators are reaching into Judy's pocket to take money she
doesn't have. And their market activity is posing a serious threat to
the fragile economic recovery.
Judy's story, and the millions of Americans in the same situation,
highlights the need to get a cop on the beat cracking down on Wall
Street speculators.
Last year, the budget for the consumer's cop on the beat, the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, was cut by 33 percent.
That makes no sense.
I urge this committee to fully fund the CFTC at $300 million so it
can do its job cracking down on speculators and protecting consumers.
3. mortgage refinancing
Finally, Ashley from in Bondville, Vermont has been current on her
mortgage for 15 years.
In spite of being underemployed for months, she has managed to keep
paying her mortgage in full and on time.
Yet, she is unable to take advantage of record low interest rates
to refinance her mortgage and lower her monthly payments.
Allowing Ashley to refinance her home would be good for her but
also good economy.
Putting extra money in the pockets of homeowners will have a
simulative effect on the economy. We ought to help people like Ashley
save money to spend on household needs.
President Obama has proposed a mortgage refinancing program that
will allow people like Ashley to refinance her mortgage and save
thousands of dollars per year.
I urge this committee to examine available resources to help people
like Ashley refinance their mortgages at record low rates.
4. conclusion
Mr. Chairman, the choices we make in the budget reflect the
priorities of our country.
As we come to grips with a struggling economy and the need to get a
handle on the federal debt, we have a lot of tough choices to make.
Some of those choices, however, are no-brainers:
We should not let people freeze in their own homes.
We should not let Wall Street speculators profit at the
expense of hard working Americans struggling to fill their gas tanks.
And, we should put money in the pockets of Americans to
spend as they see fit by making it easy to refinance their mortgages.
I hope you'll consider these three Vermonters as you put together
the budget for fiscal year 2013.
Thank you.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. You have any questions?
Mr. Van Hollen. No.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. We will
now recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gohmert for five
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. LOUIE GOHMERT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Gohmert. Thank you. I do appreciate the opportunity to
testify before this committee. I was really struck with the
last budget that even though it would not balance for 25 or 26
years, the chairman and others were just demonized, basically,
for even proposing the cuts they did. We have got to do better,
and there are ways to do that without hurting everybody.
Back in 2008 when Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid were in
charge of the Congress, we did not hear any complaints, or not
much of any complaints, that we were not spending enough money.
There is no reason we could not go back to 2008 levels and
immediately drop over $1 trillion that has spent above what we
have been doing in the past. So I would suggest that as one
thing; go back to 2008 levels.
Another thing, while America does not know, but we cut our
budgets over 5 percent last year and this year they are being
cut by over 6 percent. We have the moral authority now to tell
every government agency in the whole federal bureaucracy, we
have done it, now you are doing it; and over a two year period
require every federal agency to cut their budgets by 11.4
percent like we have done in the House. If we do not do that,
and use the moral authority it gives us, it is just pennies
compared to the overall federal budget. If we do it, it is
extremely meaningful.
We pass the zero baseline budget in the House; I'm thrilled
with that. I do think it is a good idea to have the biennial
budget so that in the off years, the Budget Committee can do
more hearings and more oversight to make sure the money is
properly expended. Also I would ask the Budget Committee, and
you have made great proposals, similar to something I have been
proposing for three or four years now, but that we give seniors
a choice; Medicare, others on Medicaid, here is your choice:
You can stay on that, or you can have great private insurance
and we will give you the amount of your high deductible,
because it appears to me that will be tremendously cheaper than
what we are doing. Now, I do not know of anybody else that has
done this, and I have asked for specific numbers from the
census on how many households there are, how many households
have people on Medicare and Medicaid, and an overall cost of
Medicare and Medicaid. Then I have been warned by the people
that gave us the numbers, officially, that these are not
official; you cannot really trust these numbers. So the best we
can tell is that for every household who has someone on
Medicare/Medicaid, that it is costing the government about
$20,000 to $30,000 per household, and probably closer to
$30,000. You can buy incredible insurance and give cash in a
HSA with a debit card, which will allow patients, for the first
time since the 1960s, to have control of their own health care
situation.
We need government out of the health care business as a
player, and a coach, and back to the role of being a referee.
We need insurance companies out of the business of being health
managers and back in the business of being health insurers, and
that will bring down costs. We also could save a tremendous
amount of money if people were allowed to pay the same thing
the insurance companies do with cash, even though they may not
have insurance.
Also, we could save a significant amount of money if we
utilized the rule when it comes to foreign assistance. Every
country is sovereign, they can make their own choices, but if
they vote against the United States in the U.N. more than half
the time, then the subsequent year they get no assistance from
the U.S. of any kind. We do not have to pay people to hate us,
they do it for free, and we can save money in the process.
I would also submit to you that there could be tremendous
savings if we redid the committee structure of the House, and I
know this is the Budget Committee, but this budget makes policy
recommendations when it sees it can actually substantially
affect the amount of money spent.
For an example, Robert Rector at the Heritage Foundation
says it takes two years to find all the welfare that is
expended in all the different budgets. You combine all of the
welfare into one welfare committee, and we could get rid of
redundancy like never before. I have some other ideas and would
be glad to submit them in writing for your perusal at your
convenience. Thank you.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman from Texas. His time
has expired so we will now recognize the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Mr. Altmire for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. JASON ALTMIRE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Altmire. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the
fiscal year 2013 budget resolution. The passage of last
summer's Budget Control Act sent a strong, bipartisan message
to the country that we are serious about reducing our deficit
and making the tough decisions to get our country back on a
fiscally sustainable path. It also demonstrated that we can
make responsible spending decisions without harming the
benefits of our veterans and seniors. I am sure almost
everybody in this Congress would agree that Social Security,
Medicare, and veterans benefit programs represent an ironclad
agreement between citizens and the federal government, a
promise that can never be broken.
I am also certain that we would agree that the biggest long
term threat to those programs may be inaction in addressing our
nation's fiscal mess. Unless we take meaningful steps toward
reducing our deficit and long-term debt and eventually, to
balancing the federal budget, the threat of crowding out
available funding for Social Security and veterans programs
will get even more real. Indeed, the best way to protect those
earned benefit programs are to make sure right the ship and get
our federal budget back on a fiscally sustainable course.
Putting our nation on a course towards a balanced budget would
serve to protect the critical programs that our veterans and
seniors rely on and were promised.
Reducing our budget deficit will require real sacrifices,
but in doing so, these programs must be protected to ensure
that we honor the promise we made to our veterans and our
recipients of Social Security and Medicare. As you work to
draft the fiscal year 2013 budget resolution, I would ask this
committee to protect those earned benefit programs, programs
that Americans have earned through a lifetime of hard work and
sacrifice. Any savings accrued from reform of these programs
must be used solely to strengthen those programs for our
current and future beneficiaries, not to pay for other programs
and not for any other purpose.
Simply put, veterans and seniors are not the cause of our
deficits, so we should not look to them to solve our current
crisis. It is my hope that this committee will produce a
bipartisan budget proposal that makes the hard choices and
moves our nation towards a balanced budget in a manageable time
frame. I stand ready to work with the committee to this end and
truly appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman, and I yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of Jason Altmire follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jason Altmire, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Pennsylvania
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I appreciate
the opportunity to testify today on the fiscal year 2013 budget
resolution and its impact on western Pennsylvania.
The passage of last summer's Budget Control Act sent a strong,
bipartisan message to the country that we are serious about reducing
our deficit and making the tough decisions to get our country back on a
sustainable fiscal path. It also demonstrated that we can make
responsible spending decisions without harming the benefits our
veterans and seniors have earned.
Social Security, Medicare, and veterans' benefit programs represent
an agreement between citizens and the federal government. Our current
fiscal situation will undoubtedly require sacrifices, but these
programs must be protected to ensure that we honor our end of the deal.
Any savings accrued from reform of these programs must not go toward
reducing the deficit--those savings must be used to strengthen the
programs for our current and future beneficiaries. As you work to draft
the fiscal year 2013 budget resolution, I would ask the committee to
protect those entitlement programs that Americans have earned through
their hard work and sacrifice.
With a record number of service men and women returning home from
overseas operations last year and in the coming year, care of our
veterans must be a priority. I am pleased to have supported increases
in funding for veterans' programs every year since I came to Congress
in 2007, and I urge the committee to continue that trend. The
Independent Budget, written by the veterans community, outlines several
areas that will help us meet our obligations. Their priorities remain
unchanged from previous years, but the increased number of returning
servicemembers underscores the need to address those concerns now.
First, we must reform the disability claims processing system. Our
nation's heroes should not have to wait even one day to access their
benefits. We can also do more to address the high unemployment rate
among veterans. Congress came together late last year to pass the VOW
to Hire Heroes Act which provided incentives for businesses to hire
veterans. Although the unemployment rate for post-September 11th
veterans has dropped from 12 percent to 9 percent since the passage of
that Act, the number of unemployed veterans is still unacceptable. We
must provide every opportunity for veterans to return to civilian life
and succeed here at home after they honorably serve their country.
In a similar vein, we must redouble our efforts to eliminate
veteran homelessness. No soldier should ever have to be concerned with
having a roof over his or her head. I stand ready to work with you to
fulfill the promises we made to our nation's veterans.
Veterans are not the only segment of our population on the rise.
Our country's population is rapidly aging, with an estimated 10,000 new
retirees becoming eligible for Social Security benefits every day.
These citizens have paid into the trust fund their entire lives, and
after years of hard work, have earned the right to enjoy these benefits
in retirement. Similarly, Medicare is another part of the contract we
have made with our seniors. Health care costs in America continue to
skyrocket. We must resist the temptation to attack either of these
programs as a means to solve our budget problems. To put it simply,
veterans and seniors are not the cause of our deficits, so we should
not look to them to solve our current crisis.
While I understand the need to get our fiscal house in order, it is
going to take more than just spending cuts to balance the federal
budget. To seriously address our fiscal problems, we must consider
systemic changes that can help bring Congress together, work through
our differences, and return to responsible budgeting.
I support a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution because
it would serve to protect the critical programs that our veterans,
seniors, and vulnerable populations rely on most. While it is true that
Congress has balanced the budget without such an amendment as law in
the past, the absence of a balanced budget amendment is exactly what
allowed previous Congresses to turn surpluses into deficits. A balanced
budget amendment forces Congress to pay for the decisions it makes year
by year, just like families in western Pennsylvania and across the
country.
Another legislative initiative that I support is the No Budget, No
Pay Act. This commonsense legislation holds Members of Congress
accountable to the most fundamental of tasks: passing annual budget and
appropriations bills in a timely manner. I appreciate the committee's
efforts to draft a budget resolution for consideration but, as so often
happens, October 1st inevitably arrives with our work uncompleted. The
No Budget, No Pay Act will stop our pay for every day beyond October
1st that we do not enact our spending bills into law. These two changes
are positive steps we can take to regain the trust of the American
people and show we are serious about ensuring our country's long-term
prosperity.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to address the Committee and outline my priorities for the
fiscal year 2013 budget. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman. Does any member have
any questions? If not, we thank you for your testimony today
and the gentleman yields back. So we will now recognize the
gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Dold for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT DOLD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Mr. Dold. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly want to
thank the ranking member as they are switching out right now.
Mr. Chairman, hard-working American tax payers demand
discipline from Washington, D.C. They want Congress to reign in
the out-of-control spending that has been happening here for a
number of years, frankly, on both sides of the aisle. As this
committee knows well, however, we must tighten our belt, and I
believe still fund our priorities. I want to thank the
committee for the opportunity to share some of the budget
priorities that I hold for the fiscal year 2013, and which I am
here to emphasize on behalf of the constituents of the 10th
district of Illinois.
One priority is education. I have continually advocated for
strong funding to increase access to STEM, science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics, in terms of the education
programs in our nation's public schools. I think this will help
us meet the demands of a 21st century job market. Even with
record unemployment in our nation, Mr. Chairman, and in my
state especially, many local employers continually tell me that
they have jobs that are unable to fill because of the lack of
qualified candidates to meet the demands.
From high school training to our future workers to
community colleges helping to train unemployed individuals,
STEM education helps put people back to work and allows U.S.
manufacturing to hire American workers. Continued funding for
these programs will enable our nation to produce students and
those looking to re-enter the workforce with the skills and
training necessary to excel in the global marketplace.
Additionally, I want to highlight the importance of
protecting our environmental priorities in our budget. The
Great Lakes are truly a shared national treasure containing 95
percent of the fresh surface water in the United States, and
serving as the primary source of clean drinking members for
over 30 million Americans.
Accordingly, I want to emphasize the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative as an important funding priority. This
vital program is a multiyear effort to clean up our Great Lakes
so that they can be preserved for future generations. The GLRI
funds are critical restoration programs for our degraded
wetlands and wildlife habitats, as well as the important
efforts to combat the invasive species that threaten our
ecosystems in our lakes.
Another priority that I want to emphasize is access to
health care. The Title X family planning program is a valuable
component of our nation's health care infrastructure, providing
family planning services and education to millions of low-
income Americans. Through these programs, low-income women, as
well as men, are provided access to preventative health care
measures, including physical examinations, breast cancer
screenings, HIV testing, access to contraception. This is why I
support funding for Title X health programs because I believe
it is important to ensure access to this basic preventative
care for low-income individuals. Title X family planning helps
over five million low-income Americans each and every year, and
so it is critically important that we continue to support the
women who depend on these health care services.
Additionally, supporting medical research and innovation
are important priorities to me and to my constituents.
Therefore, I ask that we provide robust funding to the National
Institute of Health. The NIH plays a vital role in developing
what we hope will end up with cures, and ensuring long-term
health of all Americans.
The NIH is the largest supporter of biomedical research in
the world, providing funds for competitive research grants to
more than 325,000 scientists and research institutions and
small businesses across our nation. I am proud to support the
mission of the NIH, and I hope that as we move forward, we can
focus in on cures for things like diabetes, where we spend $235
billion annually on diabetes alone.
A top priority of mine will always be ensuring the safety
and security of the United States, Mr. Chairman, and central to
this is my belief that national security of the United States
is directly tied to the strength and security of the state of
Israel. This is why I want to emphasize the particular
importance of providing strong funding for the joint U.S./
Israel missile defense programs. With Hamas and Hezbollah
possessing over 65,000 rockets and missiles aimed squarely at
Israel, as well as the continuing threat to our ally of Iran's
advanced ballistic missiles, it is essential that we continue
with the vital U.S./Israel missile and rocket defense programs.
Strategic cooperation with Israel is critical and mutually
beneficial, providing Israel with the capability to defend its
citizens against imminent missile threats and providing the
United States with critical data and technology for our own
missile defense programs. Congress must continue to lead on
these programs that are vital to Israel's security and future.
Finally, I want to recognize the importance of leaders in
Washington being honest with the American public when it comes
to the need to fix Medicare's looming insolvency. Medicare's
most recent annual report says that if left on its current
path, Medicare will go bankrupt by 2024. As Medicare's own
trustees acknowledge, if action is taken sooner rather than
later, more options and more time will be available to phase in
the changes so that none of those affected, or that those
affected, have adequate time to prepare.
Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired, but I do want to
emphasize that bipartisan solutions are going to be the answer
going forward and we have to come together here in our nation's
capital to provide a budget document that reigns in the out-of-
control spending and still funds our priorities. With that, I
yield back.
[The prepared statement of Robert Dold follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert J. Dold, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Illinois
Mr. Chairman, the hardworking American taxpayers demand discipline
from Washington, and they want Congress to rein-in the years of
overspending. As this Committee well knows, however, we must tighten
our belt and continue to fund our priorities. I want to thank this
Committee for the opportunity to share some of the budget priorities I
hold for FY13, and which I am here to emphasize on behalf of the Tenth
District of Illinois.
One priority is education. I have continuously advocated for strong
funding to increase access to STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering,
Math) education programs in our nation's public schools, which will
help us meet the demands of a 21st Century job market. Even with record
unemployment in our nation and in my state, many local employers tell
me that they cannot find workers qualified to meet their demands. From
high schools training our future workers, to community colleges helping
to train unemployed individuals, STEM education helps put people back
to work and allows US manufacturers to hire American workers. Continued
funding for these programs will enable our nation to produce students,
and those looking to re-enter the workforce, with the skills and
training necessary to excel in the global marketplace.
Additionally, I want to highlight the importance of protecting
environmental priorities in our budget. The Great Lakes are truly a
shared national treasure, containing 95% of surface fresh water in the
United States and serving as the primary source of clean drinking water
for 30 million people. Accordingly, I want to emphasize the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative as an important funding priority. This vital
program is a multi-year effort to clean up our lakes so that they can
be preserved for generations to come. The GLRI funds critical
restoration programs for our degraded wetlands and wildlife habitats,
as well as important efforts to combat invasive species that threaten
the ecosystems of our lakes.
Another priority I want to emphasize is access to health care. The
Title X Family Planning Program is a valuable component of our nation's
health care infrastructure, providing family planning services and
education to millions of low-income Americans. Through these programs,
low-income women, as well as men, are provided access to preventative
health care measures, including physical examinations, breast cancer
screenings, HIV testing, and access to contraception. I support funding
for Title X health programs because I believe it is important to ensure
access to this basic preventative care for low-income individuals.
Title X family planning helps over 5 million low-income Americans each
year, and so it is critically important that we continue to support the
women who depend on these health care services.
Additionally, supporting medical research and innovation are
important priorities to me and my constituents. Therefore, I ask that
we provide robust funding to the National Institutes of Health. NIH
plays a vital role in developing cures and ensuring the long-term
health of all Americans. NIH is the largest supporter of biomedical
research in the world, providing funds for competitive research grants
to more than 325,000 scientists at research institutions and small
businesses across our nation. I am proud to support the mission of the
NIH.
A top priority of mine will always be ensuring the safety and
security of the United States, and central to this is my belief that
the national security of the U.S. is directly tied to the strength and
security of the State of Israel. This is why I want to emphasize the
particular importance of providing strong funding for joint U.S.-
Israeli missile defense programs. With Hamas and Hezbollah possessing
over 65,000 rockets and missiles aimed squarely at Israel, as well as
the continuing threat to our ally of Iran's advanced ballistic
missiles, it is essential that we continue with the vital U.S.-Israeli
missile and rocket defense programs. Strategic cooperation with Israel
is critical and mutually beneficial, providing Israel with the
capability to defend its citizens against imminent missile threats and
providing the United States with critical data and technology for our
own missile defense programs. Congress must continue to lead on these
programs that are vital to Israel's security and future.
I also want to take a moment to talk about the importance of
foreign aid to U.S. leadership, national security, and strategic
interests around the world. On average, Americans believe we spend 25%
of our budget on foreign aid; if you ask what they think we should
spend on foreign aid, people say 10% of our budget. As you know, the
amount we actually spend is around 1% of our budget. So, I want to make
sure that the Committee keeps in mind this vast disparity between
perception and reality when looking at the foreign affairs budget.
Finally, I want to recognize the importance of leaders in
Washington being honest with the American people when it comes to the
need to fix Medicare's looming insolvency. Medicare's most recent
Annual Report says that if left on its current path, Medicare will go
bankrupt by 2024. As Medicare's own Trustees acknowledge, ``If action
is taken sooner rather than later, more options and more time will be
available to phase in changes so that those affected have adequate time
to prepare.'' If we want to show the American people that we are
serious about getting this country back on stable financial ground, we
have a responsibility to be honest and acknowledge that doing nothing
to fix Medicare is a decision in itself to let the program go
bankrupt--one that would ultimately lead to dramatic cuts down the road
on those vulnerable Americans who need the program the most. The big
issues in this country require bipartisan solutions, so I am encouraged
by the bipartisan efforts of Chairman Ryan and Senator Wyden to look
for ways to secure Medicare for our future. I am certainly open to
looking at any serious, bipartisan proposal that strengthens the future
of the Medicare program so that our children and grandchildren can
share in the program's promise.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman, and I thank you all
for your testimony. We will pause here for a movement in the
committee without going into recess as we transfer the next set
of members who are testifying, and allow them to take their
places and change out the name places.
Mr. Gohmert. Mr. Chairman, while they are transitioning,
could I make one point about the tool asking unanimous consent
very quickly as they are coming up?
With regard to CBO, critical tool of this committee, we saw
with Obamacare they originally said over $1 trillion in costs,
then they came down to $800 billion, and now it is going to be
over $1 trillion. This committee deserves better than an agency
with plus or minus 25 percent margin of error. I have run this
by Art Laffer.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman for those comments. We
will now recognize, in the order that has been prearranged
here, we are going to recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
Johnson, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. HANK JOHNSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Congressman Chaffetz, and
Congresswoman Bass for holding this hearing today and giving me
the opportunity to testify on President Obama's fiscal year
2013 budget proposal. Preparing a budget proposal and sending
it to the Congress is no easy feat. I sincerely believe that
the president's budget proposal is a balanced approach that
includes short term incentives to spur immediate job growth,
and includes long term deficit reduction. I strongly urge this
committee to follow the president's lead and invest in America.
Lift up low- and middle-income families by investing in
education, veterans, and unemployment insurance for Americans
trying to find work. I specifically encourage this committee to
give high priority to Work Force Investment Act funding, viral
hepatitis research funding, legal services for the lower income
individuals, and housing and foreclosure prevention programs.
This morning, I would like to focus on the low-income home
energy assistance program, commonly referred as LIHEAP. I know
that this committee will have tough decisions to make in this
difficult economic environment, but I urge this committee to
make LIHEAP a priority in its budget. LIHEAP is a federal
program that helps low-income individuals, households, and
seniors with their energy bills.
Since its inception in 1981, it has provided vital
assistance during both the harsh cold northern winters and hot
summers in the south. In 2011 in my home state of Georgia,
LIHEAP provided more than 228,000 households with LIHEAP
financial assistance. There were, however, roughly 1 million
eligible households in the state. That means that there were
hundreds of thousands of families that may have gone without
heat in the winter or cooling relief in the hot, sweltering
summer months.
Georgia was hit hard late last year when its LIHEAP funds
were exhausted. I want to ensure my constituents that LIHEAP
funding will be available to them in the future. We are digging
ourselves out of hard economic times and energy prices remain
high. Americans are struggling to pay their heating and cooling
bills. Many households receiving heating and cooling assistance
are home to senior citizens, disabled residents, and children.
No one in America, especially the most vulnerable among us,
should have to choose between heating and food for his or her
family or buying medication. For these reasons, I ask this
committee to make LIHEAP a priority in its budget resolution.
LIHEAP is a vital program that will ensure that the neediest
among us are not left to freeze in the winter and bake in the
summer. Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Hank Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., a
Representative in Congress From the State of Georgia
Thank you Chairman Ryan, and Ranking Member Van Hollen for holding
this hearing today and giving me the opportunity to testify on
President Obama's fiscal year 2013 budget proposal.
Preparing a budget proposal and sending it to Congress is no easy
feat. I sincerely believe that the President's budget proposal is a
balanced approach that includes short-term initiatives to spur
immediate job growth and includes long-term deficit reduction.
I strongly urge this Committee to follow the President's lead and
invest in America. Lift up low and middle income families by investing
in education, veterans, and unemployment insurance for Americans trying
to find work.
I specifically encourage this Committee to give high priority to
Workforce Investment Act funding, viral hepatitis research funding,
legal services for low-income individuals, and housing and foreclosure
prevention programs.
This morning, I would like to focus on the Low Income Home Energy
Assistance Program, commonly referred to as LIHEAP.
I know that this Committee will have to make some tough decisions
in this difficult economic environment, but I urge this Committee to
make LIHEAP a priority in its budget.
LIHEAP is a federal program that helps low-income households and
seniors with their energy bills. Since its inception in 1981, it has
provided vital assistance during both the harsh, cold northern winters
and hot summers in the South.
In 2011, in my home state of Georgia, LIHEAP provided more than
228,000 households with LIHEAP financial assistance. There were,
however, roughly one million eligible households in the state.
That means that there were hundreds of thousands of families that
may have gone without heat in the winter or cooling relief in the hot,
sweltering summer months.
Georgia was hit hard late last year when its LIHEAP funds were
exhausted. I want to ensure my constituents that LIHEAP funding will be
available for them in the future. We are digging ourselves out of hard
economic times and energy prices remain high. Americans are struggling
to pay their heating and cooling bills.
Many households receiving heating and cooling assistance are home
to senior citizens, disabled residents, and children.
No one in America, especially the most vulnerable among us, should
have to choose between heating and food for his or her family or buying
medication.
For these reasons, I ask this Committee to make LIHEAP a priority
in its budget resolution. LIHEAP is a vital program that will ensure
that the neediest among us are not left to freeze in the winter and
bake in the summer.
Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. I thank the gentleman from
Georgia, and we will now recognize the gentlewoman from Hawaii
for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you very much Chairman Chaffetz and
Ranking Member Bass. This is my second year that Congresswoman
Bass has sat before me when I do this testimony.
First of all, I appreciate the opportunity to provide
testimony regarding the 2013 budget resolution, which the
Congress is working towards. As we all know, the budget
statement by any legislative body is our foremost policy
statement, and in that vein I would like to say that I would
like to see us be very strong on simple concepts of fairness
and equality.
Now, let me give you couple of examples that I would like
to see incorporated. This, of course, affects Hawaii primarily,
but it also affects other areas as well. The first I would like
to discuss is what we call COFA, which is the Compact of Free
Association. Many of us may not remember how that came about.
It was when the United States did nuclear tests in the Pacific
and as a result, we have resulted with three treaties. One with
the Republic of the Marshal Islands, another with the Federated
States of Micronesia, and of course, the third is with the
Republic of Palau. What the COFA does is it permits them free
access, migration into the United States, and benefits,
primarily in the areas of health, education, housing, and I
mean free migration.
Unfortunately, what we have not done, as a country, is to
bear that burden, so though the majority of it is being borne
by Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas,
it has now spread to Arkansas, California, Washington, Oregon,
Utah, and Arizona that have substantial populations.
What does this mean? In 2004, we have now grown since that
date where we first established a $30 million reimbursement or
basically compensation for these areas. We have now grown in
population 80 percent. The cost has gone up to about $1 billion
when you look at what was borne from 2004 to present for these
various locations. Hawaii alone is facing a deficit of 62
percent of that $1 billion for that period of time, 62 percent.
What does the United States give the areas that is facing
this burden? $30 million with a proposal of an additional $5
million to be split by all of us. You can imagine, it is
estimated a yearly burden now is about $185 million, but $30
million is all we're getting to the $185 million that we are
faced with. They are not eligible for benefits such as TANF,
Medicaid, and SNAP, which is food stamp. They are not eligible
for that, so who pays? The states pay, and as I said earlier,
Hawaii is hit by $620 million since 2004 uncompensated.
Fairness and equity should be something that governs our
budget, and we cannot continue to expect us or the other states
and our insular territories to bear that burden.
In addition to that, I would like for the committee to
consider another point, again, related to our isolated
location. We are able to travel between our islands only by
air, and as you can imagine, that we have about 1.3 million
people, the bulk of the people, they are spread between all the
respective islands. It means that when we travel, part of the
budget, as we asses, for example, $100 special fees, facilities
fees, we bear that burden disproportionately.
I would like for this committee to consider that when we
look at, for example, the $100 per flight fee on commercial and
general aviation, and also what is called a $5 per one way trip
for passenger security because what that does for those of us
in Hawaii, as it is the only mode of transportation, we end up
paying 25 percent more on inter-island passenger flights, 25
percent more than any place else, and the reason is simple. Our
major hospitals are on the main island of Oahu. Most of all the
different types of activities that go on is on the major island
of Oahu.
You can imagine, when people who are on fixed income must
get special medical care, they have got to travel. Our travel
inter-island is about 5.5 million a year. That is the only way,
whether you are meeting family, you are getting together, or
when you cannot even do anything other than to seek that
important medical care. So those are examples, and I hope that
what we adopt is a policy of fairness and equality among all of
us. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Colleen Hanabusa follows:]
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, I had no idea that you could not
travel without the boat.
Ms. Hanabusa. We cannot even do boat, unless you have a
nice boat. It is just air travel.
Mr. Chaffetz. Well thank you for your testimony. I
personally would love to work with you on that issue, so I
thank you for bringing that to light.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chaffetz. We will now recognize the gentlewoman from
Tennessee, Ms. Blackburn, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE
Ms. Blackburn. Thank you, Chairman Chaffetz and Ranking
Member Bass. Thank you for the committee doing this and
allowing us to be here. I have two legislative initiatives that
I think could be included and have an impact on our fiscal year
2013 budget.
Basically what we have learned through the decades is that
the federal government in essence, forces irrational and
expensive health care decisions on Americans by requiring
seniors to forfeit their private insurance and join Medicare.
Currently, when someone turns 65 years of age, they are
automatically required to join Medicare Part A. If individuals
choose to waive their Medicare Part A entitlement because they
prefer private health insurance or for any other reason, they
lose their Social Security benefits, even though they have paid
payroll taxes to fund those benefits during their entire
working lives. The individual also loses the ability to make
further tax free contributions to their health savings account,
and is unable to use the funds saved in their HSA to contract
privately for health care services outside of Medicare.
Now, my legislation, HR 103 is an idea that grew out of a
town hall meeting in my district. It called the Health Care
Choices for Seniors Act; it allows seniors to choose their HSA
over Medicare without a penalty. HR 103 splits the connection
between Social Security and Medicare; it provides a premium
support for those that opt out of Medicare in return for their
years of paying Medicare payroll taxes and would allow
individuals to continue tax free contributions to their health
savings account. Additionally, the bill would delay enrollment
penalties until age 70 to allow seniors more flexibility to
keep their health savings account after age 65.
Unfortunately, uncertainty in Medicare is not the only
issue facing our nation's seniors. They are also very worried
about the solvency of the Social Security trust fund. So,
therefore, we have the Savings for Seniors Act. Beginning in
fiscal year 2013 and every year thereafter, 100 percent of the
overall Social Security tax receipts that are not used to pay
current Social Security expenses are placed in an off-budget
account. The funds placed in the off-budget account will not be
invested in federal government bonds, the money would remain in
the off-budget account until Congress passes legislation that
approves an investment vehicle that does not allow the federal
government to raid the Social Security account by spending
money invested in government bonds.
A bipartisan Social Security investment commission would be
created with individuals appointed by the House, the Senate,
the president. The commission will provide a report to Congress
by October 1st, 2013 and then Congress will use the work of the
investment commission to determine the best methods for placing
those funds. Until passage, no moneys issued to the Social
Security trust fund could be invested.
Both of these provisions are based on fairness to tax
payers and delivered with the reminder to each and every one of
us, and the recognition that tax payer money is not the federal
government's money. It is the tax payer money, and we, as
members, are charged with being wise and judicious and
responsible stewards of those funds. As I said, these bills
grew from concern from seniors in my district and from ideas
that came forth at my town halls, and I appreciate so much the
opportunity to present them. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Marsha Blackburn follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Tennessee
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for inviting me here today and giving me the
opportunity to testify.
I would like to present a few of my legislative initiatives that I
think you may find interesting as you prepare the FY 2013 Budget.
The federal government forces irrational and expensive healthcare
decisions on Americans by requiring seniors to forfeit their private
insurance and join Medicare.
Currently, when seniors turn 65, they are automatically required to
join Medicare Part A.
If individuals choose to waive their Medicare Part A entitlement
because they prefer private health insurance or for any other reason,
they lose their Social Security benefits. Even though they have paid
payroll taxes to fund those benefits during their entire working lives.
The individual also loses the ability to make further tax-free
contributions to their HSA and is unable to use the funds saved in
their HSA to contract privately for healthcare services outside of
Medicare.
To give seniors more choice in their healthcare, H.R. 103,
Healthcare Choices for Seniors Act, allows seniors to choose their HSA
over Medicare without penalty.
H.R. 103 splits the connection between Social Security and
Medicare, provides a voucher for those that opt-out of Medicare in
return for their years of paying Medicare payroll taxes, and would
allow individuals to continue tax-free contributions to their HSA.
Additionally, the bill would delay enrollment penalties until age
70 to allow seniors more flexibility to keep their HSA after age 65.
Unfortunately uncertainty in Medicare is not the only issue facing
our nation's seniors. They are also worried about the solvency of
Social Security.
saving for seniors
Beginning in fiscal year 2013, and every year thereafter, 100% of
the overall Social Security Tax Receipts, that are not used to pay
current Social Security expenses, are placed in an off-budget account.
The funds placed in the off-budget account will not be invested in
Federal Government bonds.
The money will remain in the off-budget account until Congress
passes legislation that approves an investment vehicle that does not
allow the Federal Government to raid Social Security by spending money
invested in government bonds.
A bipartisan Social Security Investment Commission will be created,
with individuals appointed by the House, the Senate, and the President.
The Commission will provide a report to Congress by October 1,
2013.
Congress will use the work of the bipartisan Social Security
Investment Commission to determine the best methods for investment.
Until passage, no moneys issued to the Social Security trust fund
will be invested.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. I thank you all for your
testimony, and I appreciate your time today, and we will now
take a brief pause as we change out the panel and move to the
third panel. Thank you.
Thank you for joining us. We will now recognize the
gentlewoman from California, Ms. Chu, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. JUDY CHU, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Ms. Chu. Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony.
As chair of the Congressional Asian-Pacific American caucus or
CAPAC, I am honored to have this opportunity to share some of
the issues facing the Asian-Pacific American community and how
Congress can help the community.
The economic crisis hit minority communities hard. They are
struggling to find work, keep their homes, and pay for an
education for themselves or their children. Despite the
misconception that Asian-Pacific Americans constitute a model
minority, the truth is that APAs have tremendous unmet needs
that threaten the well-being of our community and the
prosperity of our country. My testimony will focus on
highlighting a few of these pressing needs, and our top budget
priorities to make sure that Asian-Pacific Americans are part
of this committee's plan to create a better future for our
country. I will also submit my full statement for the record.
First, on unemployment: Pervasive unemployment continues to
drag down our economic recovery. Data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics show that amongst the unemployed, Asian men and
women have the longest average duration of unemployment. To
help these long-term unemployed, we should invest in high-
quality job training and education services to meet the needs
of workers and employers.
While funding has remained fairly level, participation
rates have jumped nearly 200 percent since June 2008 in the
Work Force Investment Act alone. Therefore, CAPAC requests an
increase in the president's budget of $.49 billion to $3.699
billion for training and employment services to help the long-
term unemployed in the Asian-Pacific American community and for
all communities.
Then there are English language learners: Given the high
rates of limited English proficiency, or LEP students, within
the APA community, one of the primary education challenges is
language barriers. According to a recent report by the Urban
Institute, approximately 24 percent of all LEP students are of
Asian descent, while only 8.7 percent speak English less than
very well, 39 percent of Cambodians, 37 percent of Hmong, 38
percent of Laotian, and 52 percent of Vietnamese-Americans
speak English less than very well.
Thus, it is important to support the English learner
education program that provides critical resources to APA
students improve their English language acquisition. CAPAC
requests a modest increase of 1.5 million for a total of 33.5
million to continue expanding the program. The additional
funding will increase the pool of educators to serve English
language learners and to increase the skills of teachers that
are already serving this population.
Although Asian-Pacific Americans are portrayed as
universally excelling in school, a staggeringly large number
fall below the national averages on income and education. APAs
face greater financial needs than other racial groups when
taking into account expected family contribution and total aid.
Only 13.8 percent of Pacific Islanders, 5.8 percent of
Laotian-Americans, 6.1 percent of Cambodian-Americans, and less
than 5 percent of Hmong-Americans actually complete college.
The lower achievement rates for these communities are largely
attributed to the many education and socio-economic barriers
that they face. Therefore, there is an important program, the
Asian-American- and Native American Pacific Islander-serving
institutions, or what we call AANAPISIs, that were established
to better support low-income Asian-Pacific Islander students
with a variety of targeted services that would help them
overcome barriers to a college degree. CAPAC requests that the
committee provide $1.9 million in the discretionary fund and
increase for a total of $5 million in the discretionary fund
for the AANAPISI program to serve these students.
Finally, hepatitis B, the leading cause of liver cancer
worldwide, is amongst the most serious health conditions
affecting Asian-Pacific Islanders. Although we make up only 6
percent of the U.S. population, we account for over 50 percent
of the chronic hepatitis B cases in the U.S. and we are seven
times more likely to die from the disease. What is the most
tragic about these deaths is that they are completely
preventable since there is a vaccine that has been available
for 20 years.
Last year, the Department of Health and Human Services
released a historic strategic action plan for the prevention,
care, and treatment of viral hepatitis. In order to turn the
page on this, preventable epidemic, CAPAC requests full funding
for the HHS plan and full implementation.
We are at a pivotal moment during our economic recovery
when Congress can truly make a difference. What is at stake is
the very survival of the basic American promise that through
hard work, you can do well to support a family, own a home, and
save for retirement. For many, this dream is becoming much
harder to obtain, and that includes Asian-Pacific Americans who
have contributed to our nation's prosperity for over 150 years.
This year's Congressional budget offers the Budget Committee a
chance to keep that promise alive for all Americans. Thank you
very much.
[The prepared statement of Judy Chu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Judy Chu, a Representative in Congress From
the State of California
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony as Chair of the
Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC). I am honored to
have the opportunity to share with you the issues that are facing our
community and how Congress can play a role in helping our community.
We are at a pivotal moment during our economic recovery when
Congress can truly make a difference for laying out a blueprint for our
economy that is built to last. What's at stake is the very survival of
the basic American promise that if you work hard, you can do well
enough to raise family, own a home and put enough away for retirement.
This year's Congressional Budget offers Congress a chance to keep that
promise alive.
The economic crisis hit minority communities the hardest. They are
struggling to find work, to keep their homes, to get an education for
themselves or their children and to be respected and accepted by their
community. Depsite the false impressions about the Asian Americans,
Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) being the ``model
minority,'' the truth is our community has tremendous unmet needs that
threaten the prosperity of the AANHPI community and the prosperity of
our country.
My testimony will focus on sharing data that might surprise you
about our community to demonstrate what programs in the budget are the
most crucial to making sure that AANHPIs are a part of the roadmap this
committee sets for our future.
civil rights enforcement
The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice is more
important than ever due to:
Hate Crimes
The AANHPI community continues to face a myriad of problems in this
arena: hate crimes are on the rise, voting rights are under attack, and
employment discrimination is rampant. According to the FBI, 6,628 hate
crime incidents involving 7,699 offenses were reported by law
enforcement agencies in 2010.\i\ Nearly half of the attacks were
racially-motivated, with anti-Asian and Pacific Islander bias
accounting for 5.1 percent of the incidents up from 3.4 percent in
2008. In addition, anti- Muslim bias now accounts for 13.2 percent or
reported incidents, up from 7.5 percent in 2008.\ii\ These numbers
indicate a trend of anti-Asian and Pacific Islander and anti-Muslim
bias that are likely to go up due to the growing anti-Muslim sentiment
in our country. By having the proper resources, the Civil Rights
division of the U.S. Department of Justice would be able to ensure that
hate crime offenses are aggressively investigated and prosecuted.
Voting Rights
AANHPIs continue to face discrimination at the polls and numerous
barriers that successfully disenfranchise certain communities.\iii\
With more resources, the Civil Rights division can expand efforts to
guarantee citizens' voting rights by addressing voting rights
violations.
Employment Discrimination
A record number of Muslim workers in the United States have
experienced alleged employment discrimination, including claims that
co-workers called them ``terrorist'' or ``Osama'' and employers barring
them from wearing head scarves or taking prayer breaks.\iv\ Muslims
make up less than 2 percent of the United States population, but they
made up about one-fourth of the 3,386 religious discrimination claims
filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2009. This is
a problem for the Asian American community as many of these practicing
Muslims are Asian Americans. If we ensure that the Civil Rights
division has enough funds, they will have what they need to increase
efforts to eradicate this type of discrimination.
For these reasons, we support the President's FY2013 request of
$153.3 million for the Civil Rights division, an $8.8 million increase
from FY 2012.
Community Relations
Not only must we protect our civil rights, but we must foster an
environment where all citizens feel respected and accepted by their
community. The Community Relations Service (CRS) in the Department of
Justice can help promote these types of attitudes. CRS serves as the
Department's ``peacemaker'' for community conflicts and tensions
arising from real or perceived discriminatory practices based on race,
color, or national origin and helps communities prevent and respond to
alleged violent hate crimes committed on the basis of actual or
perceived race, color national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual
orientation, religion or disability. To carry out its goal, CRS
implemented several strategies and programs including an Anti-Racial
Profiling Program and Sikh Cultural Awareness program. We support the
President's FY request of $12 million.
economic development
Unemployment
The pervasive unemployment continues to be an anchor in economic
recovery. This is especially true in the Asian American community where
long-term job unemployment continues to haunt our pursuit of the
American dream. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that
among unemployed persons, Asian men and women have the longest average
duration of unemployment. [See graph]
The data demonstrates the need for job creation solutions for not
just the unemployed, but for the long-term unemployed. High-quality job
training and education services to meet the needs of workers and
employers are essential to putting Americans and our community back to
work.
Employment, or rather, the lack of employment is a significant
issue for our community.
Aggregate data for 2009 shows that the unemployment rate for the
Asian American civilian labor force (7.9%) is lower than that of the
overall population (9.9%). However, disaggregated data shows that the
unemployment rate is higher for certain subgroups such as Southeast
Asians, including Cambodians (11.4%), Hmong (12.4%), and Laotians
(13.1%). The data also indicates that the unemployment rate for the
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) civilian labor force
(13.2%) is much higher than that of the overall population and is
particularly acute among Samoans (17%). Finally, the data confirms that
no AANHPI group has been left untouched by the recent economic
downturn, with every subgroup experiencing increased unemployment
between 2008 and 2009.
The Employment and Training Administration at the Department of
Labor spearheads provided job training and reemployment services to
millions of people in need of these services to get back to work or
upgrade their skills for higher paying career opportunities. In fact,
last year nearly 15 million participated in the Workforce Investment
Act (WIA) and Wagner-Peyser programs including disadvantaged youth and
workers who have lost their jobs as a result of plant closings or mass
layoffs. Further, over 7 million workers gained the employment related
assistance and training they needed last year through these programs to
reenter the workforce. While funding has remained relatively steady for
these programs over the past few years, participation rates have jumped
nearly 200 percent since June 2008 in the WIA program alone with
workers struggling to regain their footing during the recession. We
must ensure that our workforce programs critical to our community keep
up with demand so that as the economy recovers and job growth returns,
workers will have the education and skillsets they need to reenter the
labor market. CAPAC requests an increase in the President's budget
request to $3,699,986,000 for Training and Employment Services.
Business Development
Further, supporting minority businesses is another key to economic
recovery and long-term growth. Minority firms currently provide nearly
5.8 million people with steady jobs, but have the potential to create
17.5 million jobs, leading to stronger communities and bolstering
America's economy. The U.S. Census Bureau reported that number of
minority-owned firms increased at more than double the rate of all U.S.
businesses. If we invest in minority-owned firms, we invest in their
potential to contribute significantly to our long-term economic
progress and stability.
The most recent data from the Census Bureau's Survey of Business
Owners\v\ says that the number of U.S. businesses owned by people of
Asian origin increased 40.4 percent to 1.5 million between 2002 and
2007, increasing at more than twice the national rate. Asian-owned
businesses generated $507.6 billion in receipts, a 55.4 percent
increase from 2002. The number of Native Hawaiian- and Other Pacific
Islander-owned businesses increased 31.1 percent during the same
period. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander-owned businesses generated
$6.5 billion in receipts in 2007, a 51.6 percent increase from 2002. In
contrast, the total number of U.S. businesses increased 17.9 percent
between 2002 and 2007; total business receipts rose 32.9 percent.
Unfortunately, this data relates to pre-recession figures. CAPAC
has heard numerous anecdotal evidence that supports the need for
targeted support for business programs that meet the needs of
underserved communities. In particular, we see a need for more funding
for the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA).
MBDA's mission is to foster the growth and competiveness of U.S.
businesses that are minority-owned, but they have faced deep budget
cuts forcing them to close offices across the country. In 2010, MBDA
secured $1.6 billion in contracts and $2.2 billion in financing for
minority businesses. That same year MBDA created 6,397 jobs and their
return on investment was 125%. By underfunding MBDA and closing
offices, these economic achievements will only suffer. CAPAC requests
the Committee provide $34 million in funding for MBDA. This funding is
to specifically maintain MBDA's regional offices, to provide their
network of centers with additional funding and to expand MBDA's network
of centers.
education
Early Education Programs
For children in poverty, achievement gaps begin well before
kindergarten. Study after study has shown that investing in quality
early learning programs can yield a huge return-on-investment by
reducing the costs of special education, high school dropouts, teen
pregnancy, crime, incarceration, and dependence on social services
later in life and increasing the likelihood of college attendance and
completion. As nearly thirteen percent of Asian Americans live below
poverty[i], and certain subgroups such as the Hmong and the Vietnamese
have poverty rates of 29.9% and 15.5% respectively[ii], early childhood
education is critical to help break the cycle and give children a
chance to succeed.
Thus, CAPAC urges you to include in your budget $8.425 billion for
Head Start, a research-proven program improving in quality; $3.278
million for Child Care and Development Block Grants to increase the
number of working families who can afford child care; $463 million for
IDEA Part C grants to help identify infants and toddlers with
disabilities and intervene early when it is cheapest; and a significant
portion of the President's $850 million Race to the Top request
specifically devoted to the Early Learning Challenge, a competition
that has already encouraged 35 states, DC, and Puerto Rico to
strengthen state early learning systems.
English Langauge Learners
One of the primary education barriers facing Asian American
students are language barriers given the high rates of limited English
proficiency (LEP) within the Asian American community. According to a
report called ``The New Demography of America's Schools'' published by
The Urban Institute, Hispanic and Asian children are also much more
likely to be Limited English Proficient (LEP) and linguistically
isolated than non-Hispanic black and white children.\vi\ The report
also states that approximately 24 percent of all LEP students are
Asian.
In addition, many Asian American students come from homes where
English may not be the primary language spoken. As a result, many enter
school with limited English proficiency, and it may take several years
for them to develop the language proficiency needed for academic
success. According to 2010 American Community Survey, while Spanish-
speaking LEP individuals accounted for 66% of the total US LEP
population, the next four languages were Asian languages: Chinese
accounted for 6%, Vietnamese accounted for 3%, Korean accounted for
2.5%, and Tagalog accounted for 1.9%. In addition, Southeast Asian
immigrant and refugee communities report drastically higher rates of
limited English proficiency than the general U.S. population: while
only 8.7% of the U.S. speak English ``less than very well,'' this is
true for 39% of Cambodians, 37% of Hmong, 38% of Laotian, and 52% of
Vietnamese. The English Learner Education program therefore provides
critical resources to Asian American students to develop and improve
their English language acquisition.
The English Learn Education programs is the Department of
Education's primary program for serving English Language Learners. The
FY 2012 request included funding for an increase in the pool of
educators to serve English Language Learners and to increase the skills
of teachers already serving them. The request also included funding to
develop and improve appropriate assessments for English Language
Learners, particularly students with limited or no English-language
proficiency, which is a large percentage of AANHPIs. However, the
President did not renew his request, but there is still a gap between
the resources for English Learners and the need. Therefore, CAPAC
requests $733.5 million to continue expanding the program.
Higher Education
Although Asian Americans are sometimes portrayed as universally
excelling in school, a staggeringly large number within the community
fall well below national averages with respect to both income and
education. A large proportion of AANHPI students are from low income
backgrounds, the first in their families to attend college, and
struggle to secure the financial resources to support themselves while
in school.\vii\ Based on analysis of the National Postsecondary Student
Aid Survey (2008), AAPIs also have greater financial need than other
racial groups taking into account expected family contribution and
total aid
Educational disparities are vast within segments of the AANHPI
communities, with many who fall well below national averages. While
AANHPIs had the highest college graduation rates (i.e., 44 percent) of
any group of students in 2000, certain subgroups have much lower rates
of degree attainment. Only 13.8 percent of Pacific Islanders, 13.8
percent of Vietnamese Americans, 5.8 percent of Laotian Americans, 6.1
percent of Cambodian Americans, and less than 5.1 percent of Hmong
Americans successfully completed college. The lower achievement rates
of these communities may attributed to the many educational and
socioeconomic barriers that these communities face. These include high
rates of poverty, language barriers, the need for more and effective
school counselors and teachers, the lack of resources that prepare
students for college, the lack of high quality bilingual education, and
the lack of culturally relevant curriculum. To increase degree
attainment, institutions must recognize the unique needs and challenges
that exist within the AANHPI community, and begin addressing the
factors that are contributing to the low completion rates amount these
groups.
Federal TRIO programs provide hundreds of thousands of students
with the necessary support to enroll in and graduate from college and,
ultimately, help narrow the gap between low-income, first-generation
students and their peers. The President's request of $839.9 million for
TRIO programs is essential to helping the estimated 41,109 AANHPI
participants pursue and complete postsecondary education.
The authorized Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-
Serving Institution (AANAPISI) program was created to better support
low-income Asian American and Pacific Islander students with a variety
of targeted services, helping them overcome barriers to a college
degree and putting them on the path to success. The AANAPISI federal
program is unique because it acknowledges the distinctive challenges
facing AAPI students in college access and completion. AANAPISIs engage
in a range of activities aimed at increasing access to and success in
college for AAPI students from student services aimed at increasing
grades, to curricular and academic program development that introduces
knowledge about AAPI students. It is important to our community that
the committee provides $5 million in discretionary funding to the
AANAPISI program to serve AAPI students.
housing
Housing Counseling Assistance Programs and Foreclosure Relief Programs
Housing counseling programs that are able to work with the
community in a linguistically and culturally appropriate manner have
been essential to ensuring the community development needs of AANHPI
communities. In fact, AANHPIs make up a substantial portion of the
population in 6 of the 10 U.S. cities with the highest foreclosure
rates.
While homeownership rates between 2008--2009 for AANHPIs have held
steady at 59%, some sub-populations have experienced major declines.
Hmong homeownership rates dropped from 50% to 42%, Bangladeshi
homeownership rates dropped from 48% to 42%, and Korean homeownership
rates from 51% to 49%.\viii\
A study by the Asian Real Estate Association and the UCLA Asian
American Studies Centers saw AANHPIs experience a significant loss of
equity following the national foreclosure crisis.\ix\ Asian Americans
average loss during 2007--2009 was -$42,900 and for Native Hawaiians
and Pacific Islanders (NHPI) was -$47,000. The national equity loss
during that same period was -$9,100.
Financial and foreclosure assistance is also much needed in AANHPI
communities. It has been noted by advocates working in the community
that of the AANHPIs who defaulted on their mortgage loans, they are
more likely to enter into foreclosure, rather than seeking alternative
means of staying in their homes like loan modifications or other
alternatives.
In order to assist these homeowners, we must first consider how to
best reach and serve these communities. The AANHPI community is
compromised of two-thirds immigrants and refugees, represents 50 ethnic
groups, and 100 language groups. Furthermore, there are nearly a
million Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. With these diverse
needs, it is critical that there is support for housing counseling
organizations--organizations that have built trust and rapport with
minority and immigrant communities and can provide linguistically and
culturally appropriate services to these constituencies. Housing
counselors can provide these services only if they receive the proper
funding to do so. The President's FY2013 request of $55 million is not
enough to get the job done. In FY 2010, the Housing Counseling
Assistance Program enacted level was $87.5 million, I support restoring
FY2013 to the FY2010 level of $87.5 million.
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
Generally speaking, HUD programs are critical to our local
communities, creating opportunities especially for the most vulnerable.
In particular, the Community Development Block Grants are important to
the AANHPI community for they provide funding to improve housing, the
living environment and economic opportunities primarily for person with
low and moderate incomes.
There is no question that the economic crisis has had a tremendous
impact on wealth. In the AANHPI community, this impact has been more
pronounced since households have loss 54% of wealth between 2005-2009--
primarily through the loss of wealth in property.\x\ The loss of wealth
has put significant restraints on the AANHPI community's ability to
revitalize its neighborhoods.
It is not surprising that the poverty rates have steadily increased
within the AANPHI community. Some parts of the community are living at
38% poverty rates and have average households larger than the average
for the total population. Poverty has forced many people who were once
homeowners, to become renters. With an inability to own a home due to
financial hardship and/or limited access to credit, many are renters
who live in overcrowded conditions in order to afford rent. At the
national level and for seven metropolitan areas, Asian homeowners live
in overcrowded conditions at a greater proportion than the total
population.
That is why the Community Development Block Grant is vital to the
AANPHI community since the formula for awarding grants takes into
consideration a community's poverty rate, population, and presence of
overcrowding. The President's FY2013 budget requests $3.1 billion for
the Community Development Block Grant, but we need more funding to help
rehabilitate, improve, and restore our communities. We should fund this
vital program at a level of $3.5 billion.
Native Hawaiian Block Grants
The Native Hawaiian Block Grants have been vital for new
construction, rehabilitation, acquisition, infrastructure, and various
support services for Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. More
specifically, these grants provide eligible affordable housing
assistance to low-income native Hawaiians eligible for residence on
Hawaiian Home Lands.
There are nearly 1 million Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders.
And one out of five persons in this population lives in poverty. They
are a population at high risk of foreclosure, and unfortunately,
renters continue to experience adverse treatment at levels of Hispanic
and African American renters. The President's FY2013 budget funds the
Native Hawaiian Block Grant at $13 million, and we should uphold that
request.
healthcare
Access to Healthcare
Access to healthcare remains a key issue for many in our AANHPI
community. Aggregate data for 2009 show that the rate of uninsured
people among the Asian American population (14.1%) is lower than that
of the overall population (15.1%). However, disaggregated data show
that the rate of uninsured people is much higher for certain groups. In
particular, South Asians, such as Bangladeshis (22.5%) and Pakistanis
(22.9%), and Southeast Asians, such as Cambodians (21.3%), Hmongs
(15.9%), Laotians (18.5%), Thais (19.9%), and Vietnamese (18.7), are
impacted by a lack of health insurance coverage.\xi\
The Affordable Care Act will provide these individuals and their
families with improved access to affordable health care and essential
health care services. Under the new law, Medicaid coverage will be
expanded to cover children and adults with incomes up to 133 percent of
the federal poverty level. Almost 1.3 million AANHPIs will be newly
eligible for Medicaid. This Medicaid expansion will provide coverage to
many AANHPI individuals and families who would otherwise go without
quality, affordable health coverage.\xii,xiii\
These coverage expansions should have a significant impact on
AANHPIs with low or moderate incomes. It is critical that the FY 2013
Budget fully funds the Affordable Care Act to ensure that we are on
track to providing health coverage to the neediest members of the
AANHPI community.
Healthcare Disparities
For far too long, the health challenges of AANHPIs have gone
unnoticed and the deadly effects of this lack of knowledge and
awareness have been deeply felt by the community. Among one
Pacific Islander-American group, 20 percent of births are pre-term.
Deaths from breast cancer are four times higher among some Asian-born
women compared to their U.S.-born counterparts.
Rates of vaccine-preventable liver and cervical cancer among the
Hmong community in California are 3 to 4 times higher than those of
other Asian American groups.
In order to address healthcare disparities, is imperative to
adequately fund the Office of Minority Health (OMH) which plays a
crucial role in improving the health of racial and ethnic minority
populations and is important to the health of Asian American, Native
Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities. OMH's policies and programs
promote informed, empowered individuals as a means for enabling
community solutions to eliminate health disparities, including those
like Hepatitis B and diabetes that disproportionately affect the AANHPI
community. In addition, OMH is dedicated to promoting prevention and
wellness; improving the diversity and cultural competency of the health
care workforce; and, ensuring access to quality, culturally competent
care. We request that we fund at $55.8 million, a $14.8 million
increase above the President's FY13 request level of $41 million.
Another important way to address these disparities is to fund
community health centers. These centers play a critical role in
expanding access by serving as a trusted safety net for AANHPI
communities because they provide culturally and linguistically
competent services that address some of the key barriers that confront
our community. The expansion of community health centers is one of the
cornerstones to helping the AANHPI community. The President's FY 2013
budget requests $3.1 billion for health center services to support the
creation of new health center sites across the country, and we support
this request.
Hepatitis B
Among the most serious conditions affecting the AANHPI community is
hepatitis B, an infection of the liver and the leading cause of liver
cancer. About 1.3-1.5 million people in the U.S. are chronically
infected with hepatitis B, with approximately 5,000-6,000 people dying
each year from hepatitis B related liver disease or liver cancer. Over
half of the chronic hepatitis B cases and resulting deaths are
represented by AANHPIs. What is tragic about these deaths is that they
are completely preventable with a vaccine that has been available for
20 years.
The Division of Viral Hepatitis at the Centers for Disease Control
is our front line of defense. The current funding level of $19.3
million was not sufficient to provide core prevention services, which
we so desperately need to fight the spread of hepatitis. We also need
more funds to support a first-ever national surveillance initiative so
that we can finally have data to share with states, health departments,
policy makers and physicians to gain a better understanding of the
hepatitis epidemic. CAPAC requests $59.6 million to fight against the
hepatitis epidemic. We also request full funding for HHS to implement
their Action Plan for the Prevention, Care, and Treatment of Viral
Hepatitis. Finally, we are in agreement with the President's
recommendation for $ 1,146 million for the HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis,
STDs and TB Prevention.
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)
The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) is the nation's
principal health statistics agency and it supports a number of ongoing
seminal health and health care surveys that are crucial to our
community. The collecting and reporting of disaggregated national
health data for the AANHPI population is an important step in
accurately representing the health status of our overwhelmingly diverse
communities. The President requests $197 million to fund NCHS in FY13
and we support this request.
immigration
Immigrant Integration and Citizenship
In the last decade, the government has become increasingly aware of
the value of speeding the integration of immigrants into our society.
During the Presidency of George W. Bush, the Office of Citizenship was
established. In its early days, that office concentrated on, among
other things, improving access to citizenship education and
instructional materials.
The Office of Citizenship plays a key role in immigrant integration
by, among other things, leading initiatives to promote citizenship
awareness; supporting national and community-based organizations that
prepare immigrants for citizenship by providing grants, educational
materials, and technical assistance; and building collaborative
partnerships with state and local governmental and non-governmental
organizations to expand integration and citizenship resources in
communities.
The President recommended $11 million for Immigrant Integration and
Citizenship for FY2013, after Congress authorized $10 million to be
spent for the immigration integration grant program out of the
Examinations Fee Account. This funding will support immigrant
integration efforts, including funding for new programs supporting
English language acquisition and citizenship education.
We strongly support this request because these funds will greatly
benefit the AANHPI community and are critical to the success of the
United States. Immigrants who integrate into U.S. society go on to
become informed voters, active community members, innovators,
entrepreneurs and future job-creators. Whether they come on family or
employment visas, through the asylum or refugee program, or through
other much smaller legal immigration programs, legal permanent
residents come to this country with the dream of becoming U.S. citizens
and giving back to their adopted home.
The Office of Citizenship has already helped thousands more people
prepare to become citizens through Congress's support and it has helped
to reinforce the network of excellent state service providers around
the country. Strong support for integration programs boost human
potential and make us a stronger nation.
Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
We also support the President's FY 2013 budget request of $1.7
million for the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Civil
Rights and Civil Liberties. It is important for the AAPI community that
OCRCL--which oversees the 287(g) and Secure Communities programs--has
the funding to support proper oversight and training so that ICE is not
a conduit for discriminatory and abusive law enforcement practices.
We must ensure our immigration budget is balanced, that it supports
both programs that benefit immigrants, the foundation of the American
nation since it was established, and also enforces our immigration
laws. Immigration enforcement alone will not fix the broken U.S.
immigration system. We urge you to robustly support immigration
services and create a more equitable immigration budget that does not
rely on enforcement-only immigration policy.
territories
The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) carries out the Secretary's
responsibilities for U.S.-affiliated insular areas. These include the
territories of Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI),
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), as well as
the three Freely Associated States (FAS): the Federated States of
Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), and the
Republic of Palau.[i] OIA is the primary federal program aimed at
combating the economic and fiscal problems in the insular areas.
Unfortunately, the President's request included a $3 million
reduction from fiscal year 2012 levels Assistance to Territories. It is
understandable in these tough economic times everyone must make
sacrifices, but reductions in the OIA funding will translate to cuts to
vital projects which foster development of the insular areas in
accountability, financial management, tax systems and procedures,
insular management controls, economic development, training/education,
energy, public safety, health, immigration, labor, and law enforcement.
I am requesting the committee to restore the $3 million cut in funding
to the Office of Insular Affairs.
endnotes
\i\ US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010
Hate Crime Statistics.
\ii\ US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
2010 Hate Crime Statistics.
\iii\ Meeting the Challenge: National Platform for Advancing
Justice. Policy Priorities & Recommendations for Achieving Equity,
Equality, and Justice in Asian American & Pacific Islander
Communities.'' http://www.advancingequality.org/attachments/files/391/
Platform--for--Action.pdf
\iv\ Greenhouse, Steven. ``Muslims report rising discrimination at
work,'' The New York Times. 23 September 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/
2010/09/24/business/24muslim.html?--r=3&pagewanted=1&ref=business
\v\ http://www.census.gov/econ/sbo/
\vi\ http://www.urban.org/uploadedPDF/311230--new--demography.pdf
\vii\ ``Federal Higher Education Policy Priorities and the Asian
American and Pacific Islander Community'' The Asian and Pacific
Islander American Scholarship Fund. 2010.
\viii\ U.S. Census Bureau Data, 2008, 2009.
\ix\ Asian Real Estate Association of America. ``AAPIs Experience
Significant Loss of Home Equity,'' AsianWeek.
\x\ Pew Research Center, ``Wealth Gap Rises to Record Highs Between
Whites, Blacks and Hispanics,'' July 2011.
\xi\ American Community Survey, 2009.
\xii\ ``How Health Reform Helps Asian Americans,'' Families USA,
September 2010.
\xiii\ How Health Reform Helps Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific
Islanders,'' Families USA, September 2010.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, I appreciate your testimony. I
would like to mention to the panel and the future panels that
we understand the pressures on your individual time; we do not
anticipate that you will be called upon again, and so if you
have to depart, we totally understand, after you have,
obviously, given your testimony. So thank you again today for
your testimony Ms. Chu. I now recognize the gentleman from
Texas, Mr. Green, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. GENE GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Gene Green of Texas. Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I am
pleased to be here to provide my views on the fiscal 2012
budget resolution. The committee is faced with many difficult
choices that it crafts in this year's congressional budget.
Democrats and Republicans must work together to produce a
budget that simultaneously meets our economic, health care,
energy, and social challenges. I have a few issues that I would
like to talk about.
Energy provisions: I want to reiterate my opposition to the
president's proposal tax increases on the oil and gas industry.
The president's proposed $85 billion tax hike would suppress
our domestic production, stifle job creation, and drive up
imports of crude oil from nations that are hostile to us and
increase the volatility of the gasoline markets. It is
important for the committee to know that the U.S. oil and
natural gas industry does not receive subsidies. In fact, there
is not a single targeted tax credit in the internal revenue
code available to the oil and natural gas industry. Instead,
the industry is allowed to take deductions to cover the cost of
doing business which have been afforded to all business since
the beginning of our country's income tax system.
In return, this industry delivers about $86 million a day
to the federal government in revenue, and yet, the
administration continues to argue that this industry, and this
industry alone among American businesses, should pay more
taxes. In fact, as RA does under the Section 199 deduction,
which allows all manufacturers to take a 9 percent deduction of
their cost while limiting oil and gas manufacturer to a 6
percent deduction?
Finally, I want to remind the committee that the average
independent production company has only 12 employees, the
definition of a true small business. We are not just harming
big oil by repealing these incentives; we would single-handedly
be destroying thousands of small businesses across our country.
The next issue is I am proud to represent the Port of
Houston, and a priority in our district is the Port of Houston.
Our port is the largest foreign tonnage port and the largest
petrochemical port in the country. In fact, it moves the
second-largest amount of cargo in the country. The commerce
that occurs at our port is critical to our nation's energy and
chemical sectors, and to our country's ability to trade and
move goods throughout our country. The number one issue that
faces the Port of Houston, and many other ports, is the future
of maintenance dredging by the Army Corps of Engineers.
In 1998, over a number of years, federal government
invested $700 million in deepening and widening the Houston
Ship Channel, an investment we have benefited from
tremendously. However, as the years have passed, the silt has
settled and reduced the draft in the channels significantly.
Today only .4 percent of the channel is dredged its proper
depth across the entire width of the channel and this is
astounding. Our nation's investment is rapidly deteriorating.
When the president's was released a few weeks ago, they
provided an extra $700,000 for maintenance dredging for a total
of just over $24 million and new funding $100,000 to study the
widening and deepening of the Houston Ship Channel to the
turning basin, which is part of our district. An increase of
$800,000 does not sound like a lot and it is not, but when the
dredging needs alone come to nearly $60 million, but it is good
to get an increase at all as every other program government-
wide is eyeing for cuts.
I am asking you today that when this committee does write
its budget that you preserve the funding levels that the
president's budget or even better, if possible, increase them
for maintenance dredging. As we continue the dual challenges of
adopting policies that create jobs and reduce the debt, funding
for the dredging projects is an item that, while costly, will
have more of a positive impact on our economy than a negative
impact on our deficit.
The Texas Transportation Institute performed a study and
determined that a direct economic impact of a loss of one foot
of draft is a $373 million impact. The majority of this impact
is lost business opportunities to due to light loading of non-
containerized vessels. If the dredging crisis at the port
continues to worsen, the costs will continue to accelerate.
The last issue is NASA, and once again, I am frustrated
with the administration's handling of manned space flight. The
president's budget funds a space launch system and the multi-
purpose crew vehicle programs far under the authorized level
and far under current year levels. They move that money to
commercial ventures which I hope succeed, but do not have the
track record of our team at NASA, especially the folks at
Houston Johnson Space Center. We cannot cuts the knees out from
NASA-led human space flight without the investments in the
space launch system and the multi-purpose crew vehicle. I am
afraid our country will not be equipped to continue to be the
world leader in science, technology, and space flight. While
this harms Houston, my concerns are not just about preserving
the work force at our Johnson Space Center; it is also about
the future of the manned space flight and the future role of
American leadership in technology. Congress spoke clearly in
2010 authorization and again in appropriations language,
however, NASA is not here and our request is that we fund
important manned space programs such as the space launch system
and the multi-purpose crew vehicle, at least at their current
year levels, and if not, I am afraid in five years we may be
sitting in a room without any programs at all to fund. Again, I
thank you for the opportunity today.
[The prepared statement of Gene Green follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gene Green, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Texas
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen and Members of the
Committee: I am pleased to be here today to provide my views on the
Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution.
This committee is faced with many difficult choices as it crafts
this year's congressional budget.
Democrats and Republicans must work together to produce a budget
that simultaneously helps meet our economic, health care, energy, and
social challenges.
energy provisions
I want to reiterate my opposition to the President's proposed tax
increases on the oil and gas industry.
The President's proposed $85 billion tax hike would suppress our
domestic production, stifle job creation, drive up imports of crude oil
from nations that are hostile to us and increase the volatility of the
gasoline markets.
It is important for the committee to know that the U.S. oil and
natural gas industry does not receive tax subsidies. In fact, there is
not a single targeted tax credit in the Internal Revenue Code available
to the oil and natural gas industry.
Instead, the industry is allowed to take deductions to recover the
costs of doing business, which has been afforded to all businesses
since the beginning of our country's income tax system.
In return, this industry delivers $86 million a day to the federal
government in revenue.
And yet the Administration continues to argue that this industry--
and this industry alone among American businesses--should pay more
taxes.
In fact, it already does under the Section 199 deduction, which
allows all U.S. manufacturers to take a 9 percent deduction of their
costs, while limiting the oil and natural gas manufacturers to a 6
percent deduction.
Finally, I want to remind the committee that the average
independent production company has only 12 employees--the definition of
a true small business.
You would not be just harming ``Big Oil'' by repealing these
incentives. You would single-handedly be destroying thousands of small
businesses across our country.
Port of Houston:
Another priority in my district is the Port of Houston. Our Port is
the largest foreign tonnage port and the largest petrochemical port in
the country. In fact, it moves the second largest amount of cargo in
the country. The commerce that occurs at our port is critical to our
nation's energy and chemical sectors and to our country's ability to
trade and move goods throughout our country.
The number one issue that faces the Port today and will face the
Port in the future is maintenance dredging by the Army Corps of
Engineers. In 1998, the Federal Government invested $700 million in
deepening and widening the Houston Ship Channel. An investment we have
benefitted from tremendously.
However, as the years have passed silt has settled and reduced the
draft in the channel significantly. Today, only .4% of the channel is
dredged to its proper depth across the entire width of the channel.
That is astounding. Our nation's investment is rapidly deteriorating.
When the President's budget was released a few weeks ago, they
included an extra $700,000 for maintenance dredging for a total of just
over $24 million and new funding of $100,000 toward study on the
widening and deepening of the Houston Ship Channel to the Turning
Basin.
An increase of $800,000 does not sound like a lot, and it's not,
when our dredging needs alone are near $60 million. But, it is good to
get an increase at all as every program government wide is eyed for
cuts. I am asking you today that when this committee does write its
budget that you preserve the funding levels in the President's Budget,
or even better if possible, increase them,
As we confront the dual challenges of adopting policies that create
jobs and reduce the debt, funding for dredging projects is an item
that, while costly, will have more of a positive impact on our economy
than a negative impact on our deficit.
The Texas Transportation Institute performed a study and determined
that a direct economic impact of the loss of 1 foot of draft is $373
million. The majority of this impact is lost business opportunities due
to light loading of non-containerized vessels. If the dredging crisis
at the port continues to worsen, this cost will quickly accelerate.
NASA:
Once again, I am frustrated with the Administration's handling of
manned space flight. The President's Budget funds the Space Launch
System and the Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle programs far under the
Authorized level and far under current year levels.
They moved that money to commercial ventures, which I hope succeed,
but do not have the track record of our team at NASA, especially the
folks at Houston's Johnson Space Center.
We cannot cut the knees out from under NASA led human space flight.
Without the investments in SLS and MPCV, I am afraid our country will
not be equipped to continue to be the world leader in science,
technology, and space flight.
While this harms Houston, my concerns are not just about preserving
the workforce at JSC, this is about the future of Manned Space Flight
and the future role of American leadership in technology.
Congress spoke very clearly in the 2010 authorization bill and then
again in appropriations language. However, NASA is not hearing it. I
request that we fund important manned space flight programs, such as
SLS and MPCV at least at their current year levels. If not, I fear in 5
years we may be sitting in this room without any programs to fund.
Thank you for the time to testify today.
Mr. Chaffetz. We thank you for your testimony. We will now
recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Nugent, for five
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD NUGENT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Nugent. Well, thank you Chairman Chaffetz and Ranking
Member Bass, not only for having us here today, but also for
the important work that you did the last year.
Obviously, the committee has difficult, but necessary
decisions to make. Members will come forward today to testify
about their respective districts and the unique needs of their
constituents. Every district is different. We have different
priorities and different demographics. However, we are all
faced with the same enormous national debt, a debt so large it
now exceeds the size of the entire U.S. economy. Only six other
advanced countries in the world owe more than they produce, and
four of them are in the center of the European debt crisis.
Clearly, we can no longer ignore our unsustainable spending
levels. We can no longer kick the can down the road, and we
must acknowledge the situation we are in, and we must take
steps to address it, and please, the committee, through its
work last year, began that process. We have now shifted debate
from how much will we spend to how much will we cut. This is
undoubtedly a crucial step in tackling this problem.
I am also pleased the committee put forth the responsible
proposal last year that preserved the benefits earned by those
at or near retirement, while attending and adding long-term
solvency to Social Security and Medicare. In my view, those
just are not important benefits we are talking about, but
rather a sacred promise this federal government made to our
seniors. Our nation's seniors have put good faith in the word
of the government and have dutifully paid into that promise
throughout their lives. We cannot default on that promise.
Florida's 5th Congressional District is comprised of over a
quarter of a million seniors so it should come as no surprise
that I have their interest at heart. However, we must not
forget that every senior in our country, regardless of their
congressional district they reside in, has paid the same and
deserves the same return from their government. That is why I
must reaffirm my position as what I testified to last year.
That my constituents and I cannot, and will not, support any
proposal that cuts the benefits of those at retirement or near
retirement in the short term.
In closing, I would like to ask this committee that as you
move forward to work in reforming the budget, can you assure me
that my commitment to protecting those Americans age 55 and
older from any benefit cuts? With that, I conclude my time and
I would open for any questions if you have.
[The prepared statement of Richard Nugent follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Richard B. Nugent, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Florida
First, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member, not
only for having us here today but also for the important work they did
last year.
Obviously, the committee has difficult but necessary decisions to
make. Members will come forward today to testify about their respective
districts and the unique needs of their constituents. Every district is
different. We have different priorities and different demographics.
However, we are all faced with the same, enormous national debt; a debt
so large that it now exceeds the size of the entire U.S. economy. Only
six other advanced countries in the world owe more than they produce,
and four of them are at the center of the European debt crisis.
Clearly, we can no longer ignore our unsustainable spending levels.
We can no longer kick the can down the road. We must acknowledge the
situation we're in and we must take steps to address it.
I am pleased that the committee, through its work last year, began
that process. We have now shifted the debate from, ``How much we will
spend'' to, ``How much we will cut.'' This is, undoubtedly, a crucial
step in tackling this problem.
I am also pleased that the committee put forth a responsible
proposal last year that preserved the benefits earned by those at or
near retirement while adding long-term solvency to Social Security and
Medicare. In my view, those aren't just important benefits we are
talking about but rather a sacred promise the federal government made
to our seniors.
Our nation's seniors have put their good faith in the word of the
government and have dutifully paid into this promise throughout their
lives. We cannot default on that promise.
Florida's 5th District is comprised of over a quarter of a million
seniors, so it should come as no surprise that I have their interests
at heart. However, we must not forget that every senior in our country,
regardless of the congressional district they reside in, has paid the
same and deserves the same in return from their government.
That is why I must reaffirm my position to the Budget Committee
that my constituents and I cannot and will not support any proposal
that cuts the benefits of those at or near retirement.
In closing, I would like to ask the committee, that as you move
forward with your work reforming the budget; can you assure me that you
share my commitment to protecting those Americans age 55 or older from
any benefit cuts?
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, we appreciate the gentleman from
Florida for his testimony today. In the essence of time we will
actually now recognize the gentleman from Washington, Mr.
Larsen, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mr. Larsen. Thank you Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Ryan,
for the opportunity to speak with you this morning. As the
committee considers and revises the president's budget
proposal, I urge you to fully support programs that are focused
on boosting manufacturing and increasing exports. We are in
such a pivotal and critical point in determining our nation's
manufacturing and economic future. Between June of 1979 and
December of 2009 the U.S. lost 41 percent of its manufacturing
jobs. We must turn this decline around by investing in
manufacturing and boosting exports, both of which create jobs
for Americans. This budget is a key vehicle to help us turn
that around.
America's future is dependent on us getting our investments
right in this budget. President Obama visited the Boeing
manufacturing facility in my district last month, to highlight
several aspects of his budget that will help grow manufacturing
and expand our exports. I fully support the president's goal to
double our exports between 2010 and 2015 and urge this
committee to support these initiatives.
The president has requested $430 million for the Export-
Import bank, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, the Office
of United States Trade Representative, the U.S. International
Trade Commission, and the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation, and $517 million for the Commerce department's
International Trade Administration. Expanding the Export-Import
Bank's authority and providing a long term re-authorization for
it will help U.S. firms compete with foreign firms that receive
government support. Support of the Interagency Trade
Enforcement Center will help ensure that American manufacturers
have fair access to foreign markets. These budget initiatives
will have a real and positive impact in all of our communities.
Boosting manufacturing is a key part of rebuilding the middle
class by providing a source of good-paying jobs and helping the
economy fully recover.
In Washington state's 2nd District, in the Pacific
Northwest, manufacturing accounts for a large portion of jobs
and job growth. From the people who work at small manufacturers
that create specialized pipe fittings and windows and doors, to
the huge manufacturer, Boeing, that residents of the 2nd
District know the importance of still being able to build
things here in America. The best way that we can grow
manufacturing is by expanding exports. One in four jobs in my
state is in fact tied to foreign exports, and that number has
greatly expanded in the last several years. Manufacturers that
can get access to world markets can greatly expand the demand
for their products. When manufacturers increase their
production, they hire more people.
I work directly with manufacturers in northwest Washington
through an export promotion program that I established. One of
the companies I have worked with, a small maker of windows and
doors, went from exporting none of their products in 2009 to
being on track, this year, to export $1.2 million worth of
their products into British Columbia, Canada, alone. This kind
of success can be replicated across the country, but only if we
continue to support the expansion of exports and the budget
initiatives to help us expand exports. So I urge this committee
to fund those initiatives that support a trade policy that
promotes exporting our goods and not exporting our jobs
overseas. Thank you for the opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Rick Larsen follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Washington
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and members of the
Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this morning.
As the Committee considers and revises the President's budget
proposal, I urge you to fully support programs focused on boosting
manufacturing and increasing exports.
We are in such a pivotal and critical point in determining our
nation's manufacturing and economic future.
Between June 1979 and December 2009, the US lost 41 percent of its
manufacturing jobs.
We must turn this decline around by investing in manufacturing and
boosting exports, both of which create jobs for Americans.
This Budget is a key vehicle to help turn us around.
America's future is dependent on us getting our investments right
in this budget.
President Obama visited the Boeing manufacturing facility in my
District last month to highlight several aspects of his Budget that
will help grow manufacturing and expand our exports.
I fully support the President's goal to double our exports between
2010 and 2015, and I urge this Committee to support these initiatives.
The President has requested $430 million for the Export Bank, the
US Trade and Development Agency, the Office of US Trade Representative,
the US International Trade Commission, and the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation and $517 million for the Commerce Department's
International Trade Administration.
Expanding the Export-Import Bank's authority will help U.S. firms
compete with foreign firms that receive government support.
Support of the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center will help
ensure that American manufacturers have fair access to foreign markets.
These budget initiatives have real impact in all of our
communities.
Boosting manufacturing is a key part of rebuilding the middle class
by providing a source of good-paying jobs and helping the economy fully
recover.
In Washington's 2nd District in the Pacific Northwest,
manufacturing accounts for a huge portion of jobs and job growth.
From the people who work at small manufacturers that create
specialized pipe fittings and windows and doors, to the huge
manufacturer Boeing, the residents of Washington's 2nd District know
the importance of still being able to build things here in America.
The best way that we can grow manufacturing is by expanding
exports.
One in four jobs in Washington state is tied to foreign exports,
and that number has greatly expanded in the last several years.
Manufacturers that get access to the world markets can greatly
expand the demand for their products.
When manufacturers increase their production, they hire more
workers.
I work directly with manufacturers in Northwest Washington through
an Export Promotion Program that I established.
One of the companies I have worked with, a small maker of windows
and doors, went from exporting none of their products in 2009, to being
on track this year to export $1.2 million to British Columbia, Canada
alone.
This kind of success can be replicated across the country, but only
if we continue our support of export expansion.
I urge the Committee to fund those initiatives that support a trade
policy that promotes exporting our goods, not our jobs, overseas.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman from Washington taking
the time to testify before this committee, we appreciate it,
and thank you. We are going to pause briefly as we change out
the panel, and for those members on the next panel, if you
would please make your way forward.
As the members are taking their seats I would remind
members to try to keep their verbal comments to five minutes.
We will obviously submit all of your written testimony into the
record. I would also let you know that we do not anticipate any
further interaction after your testimony, so please feel free
to leave the panel. We know how pressing a lot of other matters
are, and we would just as soon excuse you after your individual
testimony. So we are actually going to begin with the gentleman
from Connecticut and we will recognize Mr. Courtney for five
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOE COURTNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Mr. Courtney. Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I am actually
going to try and get within that five minutes, or below the
five minutes, because I know you have a lot of input that you
have to hear today and votes are coming up soon.
Again, I just appreciate the opportunity to comment on a
couple of issues regarding the 2013 budget. In January, we had
the release of a strategic review, a process that started under
Secretary Gates and followed through under Secretary Panetta,
and again, I think it was a very healthy process that looked
beyond the situation that we are in right now in terms of our
national security needs, and tried to, again, come up with a
reorientation in terms of what our future defense alignment
should be. One of the items, obviously, which was well-reported
in the press, is the reorientation towards Asia-Pacific, which
is, again, an areas where there are some strategic challenges
that our nation faces, particularly in terms of access to
critical parts of the world and, obviously, an emerging
military in China that, again, is going to be an issue that
hopefully as a nation we are going to be able to mediate in a
peaceful manner, but nonetheless, a challenge that we have to
address. China released its defense budget a few days ago; it
was an 11 percent increase in terms of their operational side.
As many observers commented, in fact, there are many parts of
their defense budget that is not transparent, and the estimates
are, frankly, much higher in terms of what the true
capitalization, in terms of their navy, their missile defense
systems, et cetera.
A key component that was identified in our strategic review
as far as a way to address this change that is taking place is
making sure that we have a robust undersea fleet, which is,
again, something that today we have unparalleled domain and
control because the fact that we have the finest submarine
force in the world; it is, again, unrivaled in terms of its
capabilities and the fact that it is still, even in the world
of GPS, something that any adversaries can never detect.
Over the last couple of years, we have boosted submarine
production in this country. We were at one a year from the end
of the Cold War up until 2011. Starting last year, we boosted
that production to two a year. As Mr. Ryan knows, Congressman
Murtha, as one of his great legacies, was to understand that we
really could not allow our fleet to continue to decline, we are
today at 54 attack submarines. At the present pace, even at two
a year, we still are going to see a reduction, closer to 40 and
starting around 2020, and again, that is because of the fact
that we still have a legacy fleet from the Reagan build-up
years when we were building five a year.
The strategic review and the budget that came out pretty
much maintains that two a year pace of ship-building, however,
the Navy buys these submarines in block contracts, and starting
in 2014, the next block of Virginia-class submarines is
scheduled to be executed. Again, the plan that was submitted in
January has nine subs over a five year period, and you can do
the math. That is actually not two a year, it actually goes, in
2014, to one, and then two, two, two, two. This is a concern
which Admiral Greenert has testified to before the Armed
Services committee, and that it is going to have an impact for
really decades to come in terms of the overall fleet size. It
does not sound like much, but in fact if you look at the
projections from congressional research services as well as the
Pentagon, this really will create some real problems down the
road in terms of being able to meet mission requests for our
combatant commanders.
So right now, there is work being done with the
Appropriations Committee, the Navy, as well as a number of us
to try and see if there is a way we can rearrange that block
contract that, again, came out as part of the budget so that we
are not going to lose the opportunity to continue the progress
that we have started to make, starting in 2011.
The Virginia-class program is by far the all star of ship-
building in this country. The USS Mississippi was commissioned
just a few months ago, and it was a year ahead of schedule,
came in under budget, and the California was earlier last year.
This is a program that the Virginia shipyard, as well as the
Connecticut shipyard, has really started to hit on all
cylinders, and making sure that this block is maintained is
something that, again, I think is critical and really should be
a non-partisan issue because it is something that, I think,
both sides recognize is an important component of our national
defense.
Lastly, I just want to make a quick point. Again, we come
from a state where insurance is in our DNA, the state of
Connecticut, and frankly, I am quite concerned about the
proposals for Medicare. When Medicare was created in 1965, the
private insurance market only covered 50 percent of seniors in
this country. Having a system that is going to basically rely
on an insurance model rather than a guaranteed benefit,
frankly, I just think, again, coming from the land of
actuaries, is not a workable system. I understand the fact that
we have fiscal challenges in this program, which frankly impact
issues like submarine production, so we obviously need to focus
on ways to make more efficient Medicare system, but an
insurance model is really just a cost shift and not a cost
saving. With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Joe Courtney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Joe Courtney, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Connecticut
Dear Chairman Ryan and ranking Member Van Hollen: Thank you for the
opportunity to share some of my priorities in the FY2013 budget. I
realize the difficult task that this committee has ahead of it, and I
appreciate your willingness to hear from your colleagues about their
concerns as this process moves forward. While there are many areas of
concern that I will be advocating for in the budget and appropriations
process, I want to highlight for you two areas that I believe merit
your consideration today.
submarine procurement
As you know, in January Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced a
new national security strategy that will guide military procurement and
priorities into the next decade. While conducted in large part to help
this Congress understand the department's priorities amidst the current
budget debate, it was also a chance for the department to evaluate
their future security imperatives as we wind down the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
Included in the strategy was a clear emphasis on the need for a
strong and robust naval fleet, with a particular focus on the unique
and unmatched capabilities of our submarine force. The strategy
emphasizes power projection and anti-access/area denial, with specific
reference to maintaining a cruise missile strike capability (such as
submarine operations in Libya) and ``sustaining our undersea
capabilities.'' Maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear
deterrent'' is cited a primary mission of our Armed Forces,
underscoring the importance and relevance of the replacement of our
current SSBN fleet. As Secretary Panetta said, ``we will protect our
investments in special operations forces, new technologies like ISR
(intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and unmanned systems''--
areas in which our submarines today already play an important and
largely unmatched role. The strategy outlines ``renewed emphasis on
Asia together with continued focus of Middle East''--two areas that
submarines have already demonstrated their unique value in fulfilling
our nation's intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and power
projection priorities.
However, at the same time that submarines take a lead role in our
nation's security, the submarine force faces significant pressures in
the decades ahead. While we have a submarine fleet of 54 attack
submarines today, we begin to fall below the stated force level
requirements of 48 submarines beginning in the early 2020's as our
older attack submarines, built in the Cold War era of the 1980's,
retire at a facer pace that we plan to retire them. Congress recognized
the need to invest in our submarine force in 2007, when we passed the
funding needed to begin the production of two submarines a year in
2011--a year earlier than the Navy had planned at the time, but nearly
a decade later than initially planned. We reached that milestone in
2011, marking the first time that our nation is producing more than one
submarine in a single year in nearly two decades.
The 2013 budget request continues to emphasize strong investment in
our submarine force. It requests funding for two submarines in 2013--
the final year of the current multi-year procurement contract signed in
2008--as well as additional advance funding for submarines to be built
in 2014 and 2015. In addition, it asks Congress for authority to enter
in to the next multi-year procurement contract--known as ``Block IV''--
that would procure at least nine submarines over a five year period
between 2014 and 2018. This multi-year authority is critical to the
continued effort to reduce program costs and accelerate the delivery
schedule for new submarines--for example, the budget notes that the
government will save $4.5 billion or 14.4 precent over those five years
through the economies of scale achieved through the multi-year
purchasing strategy.
The budget also invests nearly $600 million in continued research
and development of the Ohio Class SSBN replacement, as well as $100
million in development of a new ``Virginia Payload Module'' that will
make new submarines built later this decade more capable of supporting
increased missile payloads and other tools. This is a critical
investment in the future of the submarine force, which will make new
submarines more versatile and allow our Navy to do more with less in
the coming decades.
All told, submarine procurement and development fared exceedingly
well in the 2013 budget amidst serious changes to many other programs--
and, I would add, deservedly so given the unique role that our
submarines are playing, and will continue to play, in our security in
the decades ahead. However, I did want to raise one issue with you for
your consideration.
As I said, the five year, nine boat request for multi-year
procurement authority made a slight change to the order that the new
boats will be bought and built. For years, the industrial base has
planned for a build rate of two submarines a year between 2014 and
2017, with a one-year reduction to one submarine in 2018. The 2012
budget plan mirrored this plan, which the industrial base has planned
towards for some time. However, the 2013 budget moves a submarine from
2014 to 2018, leaving a build rate of one submarine in 2014 and two in
the following years.
While seemingly a small change in the scheme of things, I am deeply
concerned that this change will further increase the submarine
shortfall between 2018 and 2022, leaving our Navy and our combatant
commanders with fewer resources to achieve their mission. In addition,
changing the schedule now, at this late date, could cause repercussions
in our fragile industrial base. Notably for this committee, that one
change is estimated to have increased the overall cost of the Block IV
multi-year contract by over $500 million--and about $55 million per
boat. These are non-value-added costs, meaning that Congress and the
taxpayers do not get any additional capability for that cost--just
increased costs due to the loss of efficiency and savings that are
achieved through a sustained and stable build rate.
In my discussions with Navy leaders, they have made clear that this
decision was made purely for budget purposes--moving the submarine to
2018 pushed the boat out of the Future Year's Defense Plan FYDP), or
the five year budget window we are considering, so that the so-called
``savings'' achieved could be applied towards achieving the spending
caps set by the Budget Control Act during that period. They have shared
with me and others that the change in the Navy budget that would give
them the single largest bang for their buck would be the restoration of
advanced procurement funding in the 2013 budget to support adding
another boat into the 2014 build plan. That change alone would reduce
the submarine operational shortfall by nearly 25 percent and help given
our combatant commanders the near-term tools they need to carry out the
new national security strategy.
While I realize resources will be tight in the 2013 budget, I ask
for your consideration for ensuring that the defense allocation
provides the space needed to potentially provide those resources in
2013 and the following years that would help accommodate the
restoration of that boat and a sustained build rate of two submarines a
year.
investing in our ports and harbors
Another issue I ask your consideration of is the critical need for
investment in our ports and harbors.
The proper maintenance of our ports, harbors and channels is
absolutely critical to the health and future of our maritime commerce--
and our nation's economy. Without additional resources to achieve this
important goal, our maritime industry will continue to struggle to meet
the needs of our water borne commerce and economic recovery. At a time
when U.S. ports are poised to gain from a dramatic percent expansion in
maritime traffic due to the expansion of the Panama Canal--estimated to
double in the next 15 years as a result--we are in a unique position
today to ensure that our ports are ready for the opportunities for
tomorrow.
As many members from coastal district know, properly maintaining
our ports and harbors is an ongoing challenge. Across the country, silt
accumulation and a growing backlog of maintenance dredging needs
continues to stand in the way of the full utilization of our waterways
and in the potential of our nation's maritime commerce. Today, an
alarming two-third of our nation's navigation channels are not
maintained at their authorized depths, as are most of our nation's
largest ports. And, according to the Army Corps of Engineers, the
backlog of needed maintenance dredging projects grew from $2.36 million
to $3.25 billion in FY2012.
The Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund
(HMTF) were established in 1986 to address exactly this problem. The
HMT is charged against the value of imports and domestic cargo arriving
at U.S. ports that have federally maintained harbors and channels and
deposited into the HMTF. As a user fee on the value of imported goods,
the HMTF has grown steadily and demonstrated itself to be a reliable
revenue source for dredging purposes, averaging nearly 13 percent
growth each year over the last five years.
However, despite a $6 billion balance in the fund, much of these
resources are not being used to address the backlog of maintenance
dredging projects across the need to sustain our vital maritime
infrastructure. The U.S. Treasury reported the HMT collected $1.47
billion in Fiscal Year 2011, yet only $791.4 million was distributed to
the Corps of Engineers for maintenance dredging. At the beginning of
Fiscal Year 2012, the HMTF had a surplus of approximately $6.2 billion;
yet, again, this funding is not being used to address the backlog of
necessary maintenance dredging needed to sustain our vital
infrastructure.
Similarly, the 2013 budget assumes a level of revenue $1.66 billion
in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), while utilizing $839
million, or 51 percent, of the fund's revenue. At the end of 2013, the
budget projects a balance in the fund of about $7 billion.
During this period of economic turmoil, we cannot afford to
threaten these water highways that are so important to our nation's
economic recovery. Similar problems with the Highway Trust Fund and
Airports and Airways Trust Fund were addressed by past Congresses by
enacting legislation to more closely tie trust funds to expenditures.
To do the same for the HMTF, I joined with our colleague,
Representative Charles Boustany of Louisiana to introduce H.R. 104--The
Realize America's Maritime Promise (RAMP) Act. This legislation will
restore congressional intent of the HMTF and adequately maintain
American harbors and waterways in order to reach President Obama's goal
of doubling domestic exports by 2015, create American jobs and
strengthen the nation's economy. Supported by more than 175 bipartisan
Members of Congress, a large coalition of ports, exporters,
manufacturers, maritime businesses, and labor organizations (including
the Maritime Trades Department of the AFL-CIO), the bill addresses
program-wide funding, not specific projects, and is not considered
earmark legislation.
During consideration of the 2012 Energy and Water Appropriations
bill, I offered an amendment to highlight the importance of investing
in our nation's ports, harbors and waterways. My proposal was simple--
it would have added $808 million, the balance of unused revenue from
the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) for FY2012, to the Army Corps
of Engineers' operations and maintenance account to conduct critical
maintenance dredging on federally maintained waterways. My amendment
was struck down on a point of order due to the fact that the
subcommittee's allocation did not provide the top line relief needed to
fully utilize the HMTF revenues that we expect to take in.
To this end, I ask this committee to consider incorporating the
full use of the HMTF into your budget resolution--a proposal that, if
approved, would have a far ranging economic impact across our country
through job creation, increasing economic opportunity and bolstering
our nation's maritime commerce.
protecting medicare
When Medicare was passed into law in 1965, only half of all seniors
could afford to buy health insurance. This did not happen by accident--
it was because the high risk of people over age 65 made that market
basically uninsurable. For nearly five decades, through recessions and
economic booms, the Medicare program has guaranteed seniors and
individuals with disabilities access to meaningful health care. Today,
nearly 47 million Americans that have paid into the system rely on the
program for care.
In light of ongoing deficit reduction discussions, some have
suggested cutting benefits, increasing the eligibility age, or
privatizing the program as an avenue to reduce federal spending.
Balancing our nation's fiscal challenges on the backs of our elderly
and disabled is not only wrong--it is counterproductive to the original
goal of reducing spending. A recent report from the Kaiser Family
Foundation on raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67 confirmed that
such a change would increase aggregate spending and shift costs instead
of produce real savings. According to the report, the change would
increase aggregate spending in our health care system by $11.4 billion
in the first year alone. The largest share of the increased costs--over
$8 billion--would be borne by employers and individuals age 65 and 66.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed similar cost
shifting burdens from the Medicare privatization plan included Budget
Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's 2012 budget proposal. According to the
CBO, seniors that enter the modified Medicare program in 2022 would pay
over $6,000 more than they would have under the traditional Medicare
program--not producing real savings, but shifting costs.
The fact is that Medicare's finances are in better shape than any
other time in recent memory. According to the 2011 Medicare Trustees
Report, the Affordable Care Act extended solvency of the program by
eight years until 2024. After this period, the Trust will be able to
meet 90 percent of scheduled benefits through 2045. Without the law,
the Medicare Trust Fund would expire in just five years in 2016. The
law extended solvency not by cutting benefits, but by slowing the
Medicare growth rate through moderate provider reimbursement reductions
and reducing overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans. And, considering
recent growth estimates, the future of the Medicare Hospital Insurance
(HI) Trust Fund looks even more promising. Over the past year, the S &
P Medicare economic index has measured the lowest growth rates in the
history of the program--below three percent.
Cutting benefits, increasing the eligibility age, or privatizing
the program would turn the clock back to a time when only half of all
seniors could afford access to care. These changes will do little to
produce real savings. Instead, the reforms will shift costs to the
elderly and disabled who can least afford them and should be avoided in
deficit reduction proposals. Real savings can be found in speeding up
payment uniformity between Medicare Advantage and the traditional
Medicare program. Coordinated care and greater utilization of
preventive care, both products of the Affordable Care Act, also holds
promise for even bigger savings.
Thank you for your consideration of these priorities, and I look
forward to working with you in the weeks and months ahead.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, we appreciate your testimony. We
will now recognize the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands, the
honorable Donna Christensen, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. DONNA CHRISTENSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Ms. Christensen. Good morning, Chairman Chaffetz and
Congressman Ryan. Overall, I am supportive of the president's
budgetary framework for fiscal year 2013 and I thank you for
the opportunity to share the budgetary priorities for the U.S.
Virgin Islands and health in minority communities.
I come before you when the Virgin Islands is facing an
economic disaster, with our largest private employer and
primary supplier of fuel, the Hovensa oil refinery ceasing
operations, laying off 2,000 employees with a myriad of far-
reaching repercussions. There are several aspects of the
president's budget that would help us, such as his general
budget policy that creates jobs and encourages businesses to
bring jobs back to the United States, and his investment in
education, innovation, and infrastructure.
Specific programs that would particularly help us are the
increased investment in surface transportation, the small
business tax credits and write offs for new investments, the
$30 billion for school modernization, expanded college
affordability and summer jobs, investments in tax incentives
and clean energy and manufacturing, the establishment of a
national infrastructure bank, and building of the next
generation wireless broadband network. We ask that you protect
these programs in the fiscal year 2013 budget.
The president's budget proposal significantly increases the
amount of Medicaid funding, but once again, I am requesting
that our Medicaid cap and the Medicaid cap for the territories
be lifted and our match changed. We are asking for inclusion in
the supplemental Social Security program, and an increase in
LIHEAP for the reasons stated in the written presentation.
I am also asking for support for the interior insular
affairs budget, which provides critical support to the
territories in many areas. My district, of course, is in an
area that is always at risk for hurricanes. The regional
observing systems provide critical high resolution data and I
am requesting that we maintain the regional network funding at
$17 million. The NOAA educational partnership program,
cooperative science centers provide mission critical research
and training. It supports our university and others to build a
technical work force and it is important to maintain that
budget as a line item.
I am also here as chair of the Congressional Black Caucus'
health brain trust, and as a former health care provider, and
so I want to address the important investments that will help
reduce health inequities.
I fully support NASA to keep this budget's overall
increases to several critical health and human services
agencies, they are listed in my written presentation, and
preserve the budget support for the implementation of the
Affordable Care Act, but eliminating health disparities also
requires investing in the social economic and environmental
determinants of health. It must no longer be that your zip code
determines your health status more than your genetic code, but
that is a sad fact for racial and ethnic minorities, and for
poor and rural communities.
Just a few examples of the administration's awareness and
commitment to this are the $100 million for the HUD sustainable
communities initiative, the $55 million initiative to make
college reality for more racial and ethnic minority and low-
income Americans, the $285 million investment in the multi-
agency healthy food financing initiative, and of course all of
the job-creating provisions and we ask that you preserve those
in the budget as well.
There are several key offices and programs to be cut that
would adversely impact the health of millions of Americans; and
so I therefore oppose cutting $15 million from the Offices of
Minority Health and the continuing underfunding of the National
Institute for Minority Health and health disparities. I oppose
cutting the $4 million from the prevention and public health
fund, and cutting $360 billion that would hurt 60 million
Medicare and 48 million Medicaid beneficiaries. I also oppose
weakening these programs in any way.
I oppose cutting over $500 million from the transitional
health insurance program, and the $28 million from the
children's mental health grant. I also oppose the elimination
of the health careers opportunity programs, the REACH program,
preventive health and health services block grant, any cuts to
graduate medical education, and to the community services block
grant. We would end up paying millions, or maybe even billions
of dollars in the future for these bad decisions.
Finally, I fully request funding for the AIDS drug
assistance program; treatment is a key element of prevention. I
would respectfully suggest to you, Mr. Chair and members, that
issues of health and safety are high enough priorities that
they should no more require offsets than the Middle East wars
or the Bush administration tax cuts, but also consider that
there will be more savings from the Affordable Care Act than we
have already begun to realize, and from these programs as well.
Finally, the Congressional Black Caucus will be submitting
an alternative budget that addresses these and other concerns.
I thank you for the opportunity to testify. You have a
difficult job ahead, but I am confident that working in a
bipartisan manner and putting the good of the country and our
fellow Americans first, we will have a good budget that will
put our country on a strong footing for the future, thank you.
[The prepared statement of Donna Christensen follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Donna M. Christensen, a Delegate in Congress
From the U.S. Virgin Islands
Good morning, thank you, Chairman Ryan and other members of the
committee, for the opportunity to share with you the budgetary
priorities for the U.S. Virgin Islands and for minority communities as
it relates to health care. While the U.S. territories, of which the
Virgin Islands is a part, always have to ensure that federal
initiatives for programs extend to our shores, this year it is of even
greater importance for the U.S. Virgin Islands as we are facing a very
challenging financial crisis. Our largest private employer and our
primary supplier of fuel for our utility, our businesses, and
residents, the HOVENSA Oil Refinery has ceased operations, is in the
process of laying off 2,000 employees and the potential ripple effect
to our treasury, and to our way of life is staggering.
While we have been working with our federal partners to address the
impending unemployment and mortgage crisis that will severely affect
our middle class, I still want to point out aspects of the President's
Budget that I believe would be of help to us as we work through the
challenges before us.
I believe in President Obama's general budget policy that focuses
on tax policy to encourage businesses to bring jobs back to the US; to
invest in education, innovation and infrastructure; and to create a
level playing field for U.S. workers and businesses. Programs that
would particularly help us as we work to reinvent ourselves include:
Increased investment in the Surface Transportation
Reauthorization that would help our roads, runways, buses and ferries,
keeping many small businesses alive
The small business tax credits and write-offs for new
investments that would lead to job retention and growth
The $30 billion for school modernization that would help
us to make them energy efficient using solar and other clean energy
solutions
Investment in Race to the Top with its resources for child
care and readiness for school
College affordability with student loan help and summer
job help
The investments and tax incentives in Clean Energy and
Manufacturing for Made In America products
The establishment of a National Infrastructure Bank
The building of a next generation wireless broadband
network for public safety users.
Specific to the U.S. Virgin Islands is my annual request for an
increase in our Medicaid Cap, inclusion in the Supplemental Social
Security Program and because our residents pay 44 cents per kilowatt
hour for electricity, an increase in funding for the Low Income Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP) which will provide relief for many of our
people, our seniors and our children who live at or below the poverty
level.
While I will continue to work to lift the cap and increase our
FMAP, the President's FY 2013 budget proposal does keep the Medicaid
program in the U.S. Virgin Islands and in the U.S. Territories on a
glide path to parity by significantly increasing the amount of Medicaid
funding.
I am also asking for support for the Interior Insular Affairs
budget which provides technical assistance and facilities maintenance
programs, assists us in developing sustainable and renewable energy
strategies and supplements our capital improvement programs.
As you know, colleagues, my district is in an area that is always
at risk for hurricanes and we have been seeing changes in intensity and
paths for the storms. The last thing the US Virgin Islands needs--or
any part of the United States needs--is to be hit by a strong storm,
especially without adequate warning and preparation.
It is therefore important that we maintain support for regional
observing systems in FY13. Regional observing systems provide the
sustained high-resolution data needed to address key federal missions
and to integrate existing federal and on-federal data into accessible
and useable forms.
To maintain a stable network of these regional systems we should
support competitive regional network funding at $17million. The
proposed cut to $14.52 million in the President's FY13 budget stands to
threaten critical access to ocean data as well as observations and jobs
that support ocean, coastal and Great Lakes economies.
In my district, we benefit greatly from CARA, the Caribbean
Regional Association and CariCOOS, the Caribbean Coastal Ocean
Observing System. These partners come together to collect, integrate
and disseminate data from deployed buoys to help support safe and
efficient maritime operations. This information improves the accuracy
of storm detection, protecting not only the U.S. Caribbean but the Gulf
region as well.
In addition, the NOAA Educational Partnership Program's Cooperative
Science Centers provide mission-critical research and training in
support of NOAA, the building of the Nation's technical workforce of
the future and supports the President's Educate to Innovate initiative.
It is undeniable that the production of the diverse group of STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) graduates is a boost to the
economy and strengthens national security by enhancing domestic
technical expertise. This important program has already lost one of its
valuable centers--we cannot afford to lose any more. Therefore it is
important to have the EPP budget maintained as a line item in the NOAA
appropriation, keeping it consistent with the original language.
I am here today not only as a colleague, but as the Chair of the
CBC Health Braintrust and as a former health care provider who--as a
family practice physician--sat on the front lines of health care for
more than two decades. And so, I also want to address one of the most
important aspects of our federal budget: the investments that will help
reduce health disparities and achieve health equity.
Today, we know more than ever before about what we need to do and
the investments we need to make in order to preserve and improve the
health and health care of all Americans. For example, we know that we
need to strengthen the agencies and offices at the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) because they are critical to our nation's
health care system. That is exactly why I fully support this budget's
overall increases to a number of HHS agencies and offices, such as the
$654 million increase for the Food and Drug Administration; the $228
million increase for the Health Resources and Services Administration;
the $116 million increase for the Indian Health Service; the $39
million increase for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
the $4 million increase the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;
the $7 million increase for the Administration on Aging; and the $5
million increase for the Office of the National HIT Coordinator.
Each of these increases together will help bolster the Department's
capacity and ability to implement vital provisions in the Affordable
Care Act. Additionally, these increases will prove to be critical to
efforts to improve health and bolster the quality of and access to
health care for millions of hardworking Americans.
But, the investments cannot stop there. Building and sustaining
healthy communities and achieving health equity by eliminating health
disparities requires an investment in so many other federal departments
because there truly is a health policy in every policy; and every
federal agency and office has a health impact. This idea is evidenced
by the fact that your education level, your annual income, the type of
housing you live in, the type of neighborhood in which you reside, and
your employment status, directly affect your health and wellbeing.
The good news is that in the President's FY 2013 budget proposal--
even during these times of budget constraints--there are aspects that
demonstrate this Administration's awareness of this notion and their
ongoing commitment to create and sustain healthy communities and
achieve health equity by supporting programs and coordinating efforts
that address various social determinants of health.
That is why I fully support the $100 million for the HUD
Sustainable Communities Initiative, which will help our nation's most
vulnerable and unhealthy communities develop thoughtful transportation
and housing plans that are affordable, environmentally conscious, less
polluted and that make getting to and from work less cumbersome and
dangerous for low-income Americans who do not own cars.
That is why I support the $55 million that will be used to launch a
new initiative to make the college dream a reality for racial and
ethnic minority and low-income Americans, and the $285 million
investment that this budget proposes to make in the multi-agency
Healthy Food Financing Initiative.
This Initiative coordinates efforts across the Department of Health
and Human Services, the Department of Treasury and the Department of
Agriculture to make reliable access to affordable healthy foods, as
well as needed jobs and community investments a reality for millions of
Americans who--because of their lower incomes and their communities'
rural location and higher poverty levels--are at increased risk for
obesity, food insecurity and unemployment.
There are plenty of other examples of investments to address the
social determinants of health that are peppered throughout this budget
proposal. However, despite the elements of the FY 2013 that I fully
support, there are aspects that I am extremely concerned about and thus
offer this plea: that as we prepare to pass a 2013 budget, we should do
so without undercutting and eliminating some of the programs and
federal entities that are fundamental to current and future efforts to
eliminate all health disparities and improve the health of all
Americans.
I understand that we are in a financially stringent time. And, on
paper, cutting and eliminating costs--at first glance--may seem like a
viable solution to our efforts to develop and pass a responsible
budget. However, many of the proposed cuts and eliminations are those
that we truly cannot afford because while we may be saving money today,
we will pay tenfold--in higher health care costs and lower productivity
due to illness and disability--tomorrow. And, there is nothing from a
financial, social or medical perspective that makes good sense about
that approach.
I feel very strongly that we cannot allow several key offices and
programs to be on the chopping block because doing so will put the
health, health care and wellness of millions of racial and ethnic
minority, low-income, rural and other vulnerable Americans in harm's
way. And so, I stand in strong opposition to the following:
Cutting $15 million from the Office of Minority Health and
I oppose continuing to underfund the National Institute for Minority
Health and Health Disparities when this office and Institute are
leading the national charge to eliminate racial and ethnic health
disparities--the same disparities, by the way, that cost this nation
hundreds of thousands of lives every year and roughly $1.24 trillion in
total medical costs in three years.
Cutting $4 billion from the Prevention and Public Health
Fund when we know that prevention saves lives and dollars.
Cutting $360 billion out of Medicare and Medicaid over the
next decade. If we reduce funding to these programs, we will be cutting
a literal lifeline for the nearly 60 million Americans, including
working families, who are on Medicaid and for 49 million seniors and
younger people with disabilities who are on Medicare. So, we will be
cutting a lifeline that is vital to the health, health care, wellness
and thus lives of our nation's most vulnerable residents. I
particularly oppose any plan that would turn Medicare into a voucher
program, shift costs onto the beneficiaries and weaken this program
that so many depend on, including racial and ethnic minorities
especially. I would oppose any plan to make Medicaid a block grant.
Cutting over $500 million from the health insurance
programs that expand access to care for those with pre-existing
conditions or those who participate in the early retiree reinsurance
program, and I oppose cutting $28 million from the children's mental
health grant.
I strongly oppose eliminating the Health Careers
Opportunity Program especially at a time when we need more health
providers and a more diverse workforce, the REACH Program that empowers
communities to address their own health challenges, the Preventive
Health and Health Services Block Grant, the Children's Hospital
Graduate Medical Education Payment Program and any cuts to graduate
medical education, and to the Community Services Block Grant. While
their absence may save a few dollars today, we will pay millions or
even billions for these bad financial decisions in the future.
Finally I oppose any budget amount that does not fully and
robustly fund the AIDS Drug Assistance Program when we know that
today's AIDS drugs are so advanced that treatment for HIV /AIDS not
only saves lives and dollars, but treatment is now recognized as a key
element of prevention.
I know that any increases would be have offset elsewhere, but I
would ask that you consider the issues of health and safety to be the
highest priorities and consider the savings that funding the above
programs would provide. Further, just as we are already seeing savings
from the Affordable Care Act, there will be more that could not be
scored under the present system and I would ask that this too be
considered. There is substantial hard evidence upon which to base
savings projections.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. You have a difficult job
ahead, but I am confident that if we can work in a bipartisan matter
and put the good of the country and our fellow Americans first we will
have a good budget that will put our country on a strong footing for
the future.
Mr. Chaffetz. We thank the gentlewoman, and thank you for
your testimony; we appreciate it. We now recognize the
gentleman from Virginia for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT RIGELL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
Mr. Rigell. Thank you, Chairman Chaffetz and Ranking Member
Ryan. Thank you very much for the opportunity to address the
committee today.
I am here with about 25 plus years of business experience
and financial statements and preparing budgets, admittedly the
budgets here have a lot more zeroes, but the principles of
finance remain the same. There are two key points that I want
to share with the committee this morning. The first is the
severity of our fiscal situation, the risk that it poses to the
Republic, and second, to address briefly the peril of
sequestration. I will come to that in just a moment.
Now, with respect to where we are, I often hear, as I
suppose my colleagues do, that what is taking place here is not
fair to our children and grandchildren. That does not, to me,
capture the severity of our situation, nor does it capture the
timeline that I think this nation will experience. Just a
potentially catastrophic fiscal pressure, it is not simply our
grandchildren or our children; it has to be moved up two
generations to each one of us here today. It requires bold
leadership on the part of this party, or this committee rather,
and I am proud of the work that was done last year by this
committee. I voted for a budget that, albeit over a 24 year
period, it did bring America to a sense of fiscal discipline,
and I hold this view that it truly is an egregious failure of
leadership by the administration to not put forth a
comprehensive plan that would set this country on a better
fiscal path.
The plan that was passed by the House, certainly, it could
have been improved; I am sure of that, but if you put that plan
right there and you ask where the administration's plan is,
there is nothing there to compare it to, nothing comprehensive;
and the president, in my view, has failed the American people
in that respect.
Expenses are the principle driver of our situation here,
but also, and I will be one of the first Republicans I suppose,
or among others, to say that revenues must increase. Revenues
must increase and do that through that the growing of our
economy, particularly energy independence. The bill that I have
to move this forward, energy independence using coastal energy
right off the coast of Virginia, I hope it moves forward. This
represents a significant step and there are other bills in the
Senate of the United States, that if passed, would help us grow
our economy and increase tax revenues, which must be done.
Another principal way that I think we could, in a wise way,
increase revenue would be to strategically go in and eliminate
what are clearly lobbyist-written, and lobbyist-inspired
loopholes.
Now, in the short time that I have left, I just want to
point out to you as a member of the House Armed Services
Committee, I have the great privilege of representing the good
folks of the 2nd District of Virginia. What is coming at us in
sequestration is nothing less than a violent, unwise,
unconscionable sharp direction turn for the Department of
Defense. They cannot possibly adjust to this level of a
hatchet-type funding to the Department of Defense. The budget
as it is, even though it has been tightened, I think the
service chiefs can work through that; it reluctantly is
something that I can work through, never fully accept but work
through, but what is coming at us, and I trust that every
member of the committee here today and really the entire House
of Representatives would pause to fully understand the full
ramifications of sequestration. It is not a wise path for this
country, and I urge the committee members to oppose it, and to
find alternatives to it.
In closing Mr. Chairman, this is truly, without hyperbole,
a defining moment in our country, we must make wise decisions,
the window for doing this is running out. At some point, the
borrower becomes the lender's slave. So I encourage my
colleagues of both sides to be bold in your decisions, to be
bold in the budget that you put forth for us to consider. The
American people are ready, they are desperate for the truth,
they are desperate for solutions, and they are ready for
leadership, and with respect to the budget, that begins here.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Scott Rigell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Scott E. Rigell, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Virginia
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen and Members of the Budget
Committee, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to share my
thoughts on the FY13 Budget. Passage of this budget is essential to
setting our Republic on a better fiscal path and ensuring American
citizens that we are serious about getting the government's finances in
order. America wants stability and security. The worst thing for
America is a future of debt, doubt, and decline.
First, please allow me to address debt. As I look at the numbers
before us, the fiscal reality has set in that we are a nation at
serious and alarming risk. Our debt has completely eclipsed our GDP,
placing us in unwelcome company of the debt-ridden countries in the EU.
And, in an egregious failure of judgment and leadership, President
Obama is not sounding the fiscal alarm. His FY'13 budget has not shown
the necessary leadership on this issue and continues to have us
borrowing trillion dollars of new debt over the next decade, with no
end in sight.
As Members of the House Budget Committee, have the opportunity to
lead on this issue and craft a budget that halts this out-of-control
spending and gradually bring us back to sustainable levels that equal
the revenues coming in. I ask that you bring a budget to the House
floor that does not just lower spending this year, but also provides a
clear and definitive path going forward to balance the budget and pay
down the debt. I am willing to look at all options and bring everything
to the table to get our debt under control.
Now, I would like to address doubt. American entrepreneurs, the
greatest job-creating force in America, are ready to create jobs now.
Yet, the regulatory environment has put that effort on hold. We must
work to eliminate unnecessary, burdensome regulations.
We have within our grasp an incredible opportunity to boldly
address two of America's greatest challenges: energy security and
unemployment. These two issues are inextricably linked. We can no
longer tolerate a stagnant, slow-growth economy saddled with historic
unemployment rates and a dangerous dependence on foreign oil. The
answer to these problem is energy--specifically, American energy. The
President has called for an all-of-the-above strategy to energy
independence. I agree! This means that we must move forward with the
Keystone XL pipeline and harvesting the resources off our coasts.
Finally, and in my mind most importantly, I would like to address
decline. Because of Sequestration, our military stands at the precipice
of an incredible decline in its ability to protect our Republic. As
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta recently said: ``Facing such large
reductions, we would have to reduce the size of the military sharply.
Rough estimates suggest after ten years of these cuts, we would have
the smallest ground force since 1940, the smallest number of ships
since 1915, and the smallest Air Force in its history.''
Jobs are being lost today. While some Members of Congress may
believe that Sequestration will have no real impact until next year, I
have news for them. Employers in their districts are laying off
employees now in anticipation of the cuts next January. Under
Sequestration, every budget line must be slashed 8-10% beyond the $465
billion announced by the President in his new defense strategy. This
means the effective cancellation of every contract your district
employers have with the Department of Defense.
In my district, I have yet to meet with a single business that will
not be negatively impacted. Some businesses have informed me that they
are filling out pink slips now. This is not necessarily based on the
discretionary budget caps implemented by the Budget Control Act, but
the $55 billion cut to the Defense budget effective January 1, 2013.
The Constitution is clear that Congress' primary obligation is
defend our nation. The Department of Defense budget represents just 19%
of total government spending and is yet bearing half the reductions in
Sequestration. Chairman McKeon has introduced H.R. 3662, legislation
that would pay for the first year of Sequestration--deferring the
disastrous impacts on the military and creating more time to reach a
negotiated deal to find the remaining savings mandated by the Budget
Control Act. I implore you to stop Sequestration now.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you for your testimony today, we
appreciate it. The gentleman yields back, we will take a pause
now as we bring up the members of the next panel. Again, thank
you for your testimony today, and if members of the next panel
could make their way to the microphones, we would appreciate
it. As members are making their way, let me just make comment
that we would ask members to keep their verbal comments to five
minutes. Any additional written materials we will, obviously,
submit into the record. We would also let you know that at the
conclusion of your testimony we do not anticipate any further
interaction, and so in the essence of time we would invite you
to depart if you so choose with no reservation.
We will start now by recognizing the gentlewoman from
California, Ms. Richardson, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. LAURA RICHARDSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Ms. Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Chaffetz and Mr. Ryan, in
acknowledging in their absence, Chairman Ryan and Ranking
Member Van Hollen, and other members of the Budget Committee.
Thank you for convening this hearing and allowing us, as
members, an opportunity to share with you our thoughts on the
budget priorities for fiscal year 2013.
This morning, I will briefly highlight parts of the federal
budget that are most important to me and my constituents. I
realize this committee has a daunting task of crafting a budget
resolution that expresses the values and reflects the character
of our country. The budget must serve all Americans, yet the
committee is tasked with the difficult responsibility of
minimizing our debt so that we can ensure that our children
have the same opportunity to live the American dream. I am here
to speak on behalf of the people I represent, the hard-working
individuals in the 37th congressional district which is a very
diverse district, but yet is facing a stalled economy with
unemployment ranging anywhere between 13 and 25 percent. My
budget priorities are as follows.
First of all, I serve on the Committee of Transportation
and Infrastructure, and therefore, I strongly support the
president's budget proposal to increase the full year 2012
levels in overall funding for transportation, including the six
year multi-funded surface transportation bill.
Second of all, in terms of older Americans, although the
president has requested level funding for the program on full
year 2012, it makes no progress in restoring the 45 percent cut
that was made in 2011 from the 2010 enacted level, and I would
suggest that you look at that section as well.
Priority number three: housing. I strongly oppose the
president's decision of looking at the reduction of community
development block grant funding, an 11.6 percent reduction from
full year 2011. CDBG funds work; I served in the local
government, city council, for six years prior to coming here to
Congress, and clearly that has already taken a burden, states
have taken burdens, and for us to not have that as an
opportunity to work is a huge detriment in my community.
I do, however, support the president's request for $475
million in funding in the Section 202 housing for the elderly.
This is a 26.7 percent increase and I have found this program
to be extremely effective.
Priority number four: education. Nothing is more crucial to
our nation's long term future than an educated citizenry, and
so when you consider that the president's budget request of 2.5
percent increase, I do support. I further support the career
and technical education program, which the president has
proposed $1.1 billion level funding in full year 2013 budget.
Finally, I want to talk about Title I funding, specifically
regarding education. This has been cut in years past, and I
would support an increase to the tune of 3 to 5 percent to
assist the children who are in poverty, who are having a
difficult time and need these special programs to be able to
advance.
My fifth priority is homeland security. I serve on the
Homeland Security Committee and therefore I am deeply troubled,
living in a port community where we bring 40 to 45 percent of
the entire nation's cargo goes through my district. So to see a
proposed cut of $93 million, that is 58 percent, I believe is
derelict of our duties.
I am also troubled by the president's proposal to cut 8
percent of the FEMA grants, and however, I do support an
increase in the fire station construction grant program.
Last two sections, my priority number seven is the Army
Corps of Engineers. I note that I am very disappointed in the
president's budget that does not provide funding for the
continuing authority projects, which is also known by CAPS for
the Army Corps of Engineers. Further, under Section 103 of the
Water Resources Development Act, WRDA, I am concerned of having
adequate funding in that program and believe it should be more
at the level of $25 million.
Finally, within the Army Corps of Engineers, I think we
have to seriously look at Section 22, also WRDA, that was
authorized in 1974. The president allocates $4 million;
however, given our aging infrastructure, this should be at a
minimum at $10 million to minimize future disasters.
I applaud the president's efforts of my eighth priority,
which is with the Native Americans. The international affairs,
which is my ninth priority, the 1.6 percent increase which I do
support.
My 10th and final priority is high speed rail. In
California, I serve as the co chair of the California high
speed rail caucus, and applaud the president's efforts there.
Finally, let me say that while the budget is a record of
expenditures, outlays, and revenue receipts, it is much more
than that. It is an expression of our commitment to the
American public, and a contract that we cannot deny. I applaud
your work serving on this committee and hope that you will take
my priorities into consideration. Thank you for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Laura Richardson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Laura Richardson, a Representative in
Congress From the State of California
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and Members of the Budget
Committee: Thank you for convening this hearing and allowing me and our
colleagues the opportunity to share with the Committee our budgetary
priorities for Fiscal Year 2013. I ask that my entire statement be
included in the record of this hearing.
Coming as we do from all regions of the country and both sides of
the aisle, the testimony you hear today is a fair reflection of the
collective hopes and dreams of the American people. This Committee has
the daunting task of crafting a budget resolution that expresses the
values and reflects the character of our country.
I am here to speak for the people I represent, the hard-working and
hard pressed men, women, children, and businesses of the 37th
Congressional District of California.
Mr. Chairman, my state and my district have experienced, and still
are going through, the toughest economic times in recent memory. The
unemployment rate in California still hovers around 11 percent, but in
some areas of my district, like Compton, it is closer to 20 percent.
The foreclosure rate for California (1/265) is more than twice the
national average (1/624). In the City of Compton, the foreclosure rate
is over 4 times the national average (1/161).
The budget priorities that I will outline today are what I believe
is needed to restore the American dream for the millions of Americans
who have been most affected by the difficult economic environment that
we are just starting to overcome. These priorities will set America on
a path toward fiscal responsibility, economic growth and prosperity,
and will provide us with needed investments that will pave the way to
the future.
priority #1: jobs for americans
As we consider our budget priorities for FY 2013, we must enact a
budget that will reflect the need to create jobs and invest in our
future prosperity. Although we have been encouraged by signs that the
economy is recovering, we can't make reckless cuts at the expense of
our ongoing recovery. Instead, we must take a prudent approach to
addressing the deficit, making targeted cuts in some areas and targeted
investments in others. We need to ensure that every American who is
willing to work to get ahead has the opportunity to do so. That is why
creating jobs--good paying jobs with benefits to sustain families--must
be our central objective.
The fiscal challenges that our nation currently faces are real and
must be addressed with an honest dialogue between members on both sides
of the aisle. We need to create a budget resolution that makes smart
investments in job creating programs and projects that will put
Americans back to work. At the same time, we must make an effort to
rein in spending on programs that are not producing adequate results.
Making these targeted cuts will help put us down a sustainable fiscal
path, while maintaining support for programs that are proven to help
the American people succeed.
An initiative that I believe will help reduce the deficit, and rein
in unnecessary spending is a bill that I introduced in the last
congress entitled ``The Cost Recovery and Fair Value for Services
Act.''
priority #2: cost recovery act
The Federal government has an obligation to the American people to
be stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars by operating in an
efficient manner. There are hundreds of federal agencies in the
executive branch offering an array of services and programs. It is
critical, especially in times when the national debt is high, for these
agencies to ensure that the services and programs they offer are self-
financed to the greatest extent possible.
The Cost Recovery and Fair Value for Services Act that I will soon
reintroduce will help meet this obligation by ensuring that the federal
agencies set their user fees for services provided at rates that are
both equitable and cost-effective. By setting appropriate user fee
rates, agencies can contribute to the shared fiscal responsibility that
our current economic situation demands without overburdening the public
or inhibiting public engagement.
Specifically, the Cost Recovery and Fair Value for Services Act
requires the chief financial officer of every federal agency to provide
a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
reviewing fees charged for services provided. The report will contain
recommendations on possible adjustments to those fees rates taking into
account the following factors:
1. The extent to which the fee will cover the agency's cost for
providing that service;
2. The extent to which each user is paying an equitable amount
considering that user's ability to pay; and
3. The extent to which the use of the service provides a public
benefit.
priority #3: help for small business
As a member who spent 14 years working in the business world before
coming to Congress, I understand that small business is the backbone of
our economy. The 26.8 million small businesses in the United States
represent more than 99.7 percent of all employers, employ just over
half of all private sector employees, and generated 64 percent of the
net new jobs created since 1995.
Clearly, if we are to grow our way out of this economic mess, small
business is going to help lead the way. I therefore support the
President's request to provide small businesses with access to the
credit needed to expand and create new jobs.
As a New Democrat and a former business owner, I am a strong
proponent of fiscal responsibility and deficit reduction. We have
already helped companies deemed ``too big to fail.'' Now it is time to
provide help for small business so that they do not remain ``too small
to succeed.''
priority #4: education
We have a responsibility to provide Americans with the skills and
opportunities they need to be successful in the global marketplace.
Pursuant to the request of President Obama to out-educate, out-
innovate, and out-compete the rest of the world, it is important that
Congress make key investments in education and job training programs
that are essential to the future health of our economy.
Nothing is more crucial to our nation's long-term future than an
educated citizenry. That is why I am pleased that the President's
budget requests $69.8 billion in funding for the Department of
Education for FY 2013, a 2.5% increase over FY 2012 enacted levels. I
also support the President's budget proposal because it safeguards
increases in major K-12 education programs to ensure that our children
receive a quality education that will enable them to compete in the
global economy. Investing in our nation's future through public
education will help to ensure long-term economic growth and prosperity
for our nation by creating a more educated and higher earning
workforce.
As a strong supporter of the Career and Technical Education
program, I support the President's proposed $1.1 billion level funding
in the FY 2013 budget. These grants provide a needed service to those
in disadvantaged communities to develop hands-on, career-oriented
postsecondary training. At a time when unemployment rates are high, it
is important that we sustain adequate funding for programs that help
individuals gain skills that will make them more competitive in the job
market. The President's $1.1 billion budget request for the Perkins Act
in FY 2013 provides a solid foundation for preparing participants in
vocational training programs for careers in a wide array of industries.
However, I would like to point out a few areas of the President's
education budget that can be improved:
First, we need to make sure that Title I funding is being allocated
to the schools and the children who need it the most. Child poverty is
on the rise, and it is our responsibility to ensure that children who
come from disadvantaged families have the same opportunities as their
peers whose parents belong to a different socioeconomic background. In
2010, research shows that over 20 percent of children lived in poverty.
That is clearly unacceptable and targeted investments in Title I
funding to schools in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods will
provide the foundation needed for these children to succeed. That is
why I support a 10% increase in funding for the Title I program over FY
2010 enacted levels.
Second, while I am generally supportive of the Administration's
focus on ensuring that competitive grant programs provide an important
incentive for our nation's public schools to improve curriculum and
overall student performance, we need to ensure that the Administration
balances its emphasis on competitive grant programs with formula grant
programs that provide funding to schools that need it the most.
These formula-based grant programs are essential to schools in
urban areas that are already facing stark fiscal realities. During
these tough economic times we cannot rely solely on competitive-based
grants, but need to ensure that federal funds are being allocated in a
manner that reflects the needs of underperforming schools.
Third, the President's budget proposal provides a modest increase
in funding for the IDEA special education program, but funding levels
remain inadequate. I would like to see an 8% increase in funding for
IDEA over FY 2010 levels. This will bring the federal share of the
program back to the 2006 level of 17.6%.
The modest increases in funding do not go far enough to ensure that
every child who suffers from a disability that requires special
accommodation will have access to an education. Failing to provide
grants to states at necessary levels will prove detrimental to the
overall health of special education programs across the country.
priority #5: older americans
When older Americans, those 50 and older, lose their jobs, they
remain unemployed for much longer periods than younger counterparts.
Many get discouraged and leave the labor market altogether. If they are
fortunate enough to secure a replacement full-time job, invariably the
pay is less, the hours are fewer, and the benefits are minimal or non-
existent.
One way to provide targeted and immediate relief for jobless older
Americans is to fully fund the Senior Community Service Employment
Program. Although the President has requested level funding for this
program in FY 2012, it makes no progress in restoring the 45 percent
cut made in FY2011 from FY 2010 enacted levels. In FY 2010 this program
was funded at a level of $825 million, a significant increase in
funding from past years. However, the President's budget proposal cut
funds for this program nearly in half and significantly impacted low-
income senior citizens' ability to find work. I strongly urge that
funding for this vital program be maintained at not less than $700
million for the next five years. And I will soon reintroduce
legislation that will make this program more accessible by lowering age
and income eligibility requirements.
priority #6: transportation & infrastructure
When it comes to creating jobs, there is no more effective means
than investing in infrastructure. It has been demonstrated time and
again that for every dollar invested in infrastructure, at least $1.63
is economic activity is generated.
Our most recent example of effective investment in infrastructure
is the Recovery Act, which thus far has created nearly one million jobs
over the first year of investment while at the same time improving the
lives of virtually every American who can enjoy the roads, bridges, and
transit systems that were built or improved through this funding.
I come from the district that embodies the nation's transportation
needs, with the largest ports in the country, three airports, major
freight rail lines, and 40% of the nation's goods moving along our
rails and four major interstate highways. And as a member of the
Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, I understand how sound
transportation and infrastructure investments will make our nation
globally competitive and enhance the quality of life in our
communities.
The President's budget proposes a 2% increase above FY 2012 levels
in overall funding for transportation and infrastructure. This increase
also includes a $476 billion six-year surface transportation
reauthorization proposal that will provide a $50 billion ``up-front''
investment to be distributed in the first year to spur job creation and
economic growth. This proposal is fully paid for. These investments
will be paid for with the savings achieved from ramping down overseas
military operations by redirecting these resources to build America's
transportation infrastructure.
Passing a surface transportation reauthorization bill that provides
funding for projects that are critical to national greatness needs to
be a top priority of this Congress. One such project is the Gerald
Desmond Bridge located in Long Beach, California. The Desmond Bridge
may not be as famous or glamorous as the Golden Gate or the Verrazano,
but it carries a larger percentage of the nation's cargo--10 percent--
than any other bridge.
That is why it is so shocking and short-sighted that we have not
rebuilt this 40 year-old bridge, which is now reduced to wearing a
``diaper'' to catch the concrete and debris that falls daily from its
underside. It is imperative that programs such as the Projects of
National Significance and the Freight Improvement Program receive ample
funding so essential projects like the rebuilding the Desmond Bridge
can be completed.
I have recently introduced H.R. 1122, the Freight FOCUS Act to
establish an office of Freight Planning in the Department of
Transportation that will be responsible for freight planning and
creating a merit based, competitive grant program. This bill provides
for public and private sector involvement in the process, and
prioritizes major goods movement corridors and projects to alleviate
choke points. This comprehensive national freight policy will
facilitate the movement of goods across the country and will also help
the American economy grow.
Investing in our freight infrastructure is vital to the creation of
jobs in the manufacturing industry and will allow us to boost exports.
I am pleased to report that my legislation enjoys the support of
industry and key stakeholders, which is willing to accept a 12 cent
increase in the diesel fuel tax paid by trucks to raise revenue for the
creation of new freight infrastructure projects. The bill also creates
a Goods Movement Trust Fund, which would be dedicated to funding such
projects, and contains safeguards to ensure that funding generated from
a specific mode is used for projects benefitting that mode.
When it comes to transportation funding, we must also be forward-
thinking and pro-active to position our country to compete and win in
the global economy. In 2012 alone, the Department of Transportation
received over 1,000 applications requesting a total of nearly $14.2
billion in transportation projects. Clearly, there is a significant
need for increased investment in our nation's infrastructure.
Nowhere is this more important than in the area of high-speed rail.
As the founding co-chair of the California High-Speed Rail Caucus, I
applaud the President for requesting $2.5 billion in FY13 and an
additional $4 billion within the upfront $50 billion investment to
invest in the construction of a national high-speed rail network.
I support the President's vision to create a nationwide high speed
rail network that includes investing over $47 billion over the next six
years. It will cost about $98 billion alone to bring high-speed rail to
California. But with it will come a revolution in travel and a model
for the rest of the country. The benefits include a cleaner and quieter
environment, reduced traffic congestion, and hundreds of thousands of
new jobs in California to build the line. High-speed rail is the wave
of the future and we must make a real commitment to it to remain
competitive.
priority #7: housing
The need for housing and redevelopment assistance is great in my
district, my state, and across the nation. California ranks second in
the nation, trailing only Nevada, in the rate of housing foreclosures.
Therefore, I strongly oppose the President's decision to continue
funding the Community Development Block Grant at FY 2012 levels--an
11.6% reduction from FY 2011 enacted levels.
Maintaining funding at FY 2012 levels would have a devastating
impact on communities all across America, including my district, and
hinder our ability to continue doing our part in aiding the Nation's
economic recovery. CDBG works. In Los Angeles County, for example, CDBG
funding has provided a direct benefit to low- and moderate-income
residents and their neighborhoods, something that simply would not have
been possible without this federal-local partnership.
I support the President's decision to request $475 million in
funding for the Section 202 Housing for the Elderly program--a 26.7%
increase over FY 2012 enacted levels. However, I strongly disagree with
the President's decision to cut $150 million from the Section 811
Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program, which funds the new
construction of housing for those groups--this represents a 50%
reduction in funding for the program from FY 2010. Our seniors and the
disabled are among the most vulnerable populations in society and we
cannot neglect their housing needs.
priority #8: homeland security
I am the Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Emergency
Preparedness, Response and Communications Subcommittee. In addition, my
district is home to many high-value terrorist targets, such as the Port
of Long Beach.
I am therefore deeply troubled by the proposed cut of $681 million
below the Fiscal Year 2o12 level.
I support the President's proposal for increasing the Disaster
Relief Fund in FY 2013 by $6.08 billion.
With the recent tornadoes in the Midwest it appears that FEMA will
have another busy year responding to disasters. While I hope that this
funding level is sufficient to cover the damage caused by natural
disasters this year, I feel that any supplemental requests that may be
needed to fund the Disaster Relief Fund not be subject to debates about
budget offsets.
My major concern with the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget is
the proposal to consolidate 16 Department of Homeland Security programs
into a single National Preparedness Grant Program.
I am particularly concerned the critical grant programs for my
district, such as the Urban Area Security Initiative and the Port
Security Grant Program will have to compete for funding with other
programs and other regions in the country.
The Urban Area Security Initiative provides funding for equipment,
training, law enforcement personnel, and planning for high-density
urban areas that are at a high-risk of a terrorist attack.
The Port Security Grant Program provides port authorities and other
entities critical funds to protect our nation's ports. Port Security
Grant Program funds are used to further a port's ability to prevent,
detect, respond, and recover for improvised explosive devices and other
non-conventional weapons.
I asked DHS officials who testified before the Homeland Security
Committee about how they will prioritize funding under the new National
Preparedness Grant Program.
DHS administrators mentioned on record that they would be
prioritizing funding decisions by risk level by region. They were not
able confirm that regions like Long Beach and Los Angeles that has
multiple attractive terrorist targets, such as ports, mass transit, and
airports will not have to compete with each other and other California
cities for funding.
The President's FY 2013 Budget also directs National Preparedness
Grant Program funds to the states. The state then allocates the funds
to the local municipalities.
This could cause reduced and delayed funding to our high-risk
cities. I have talked to port authority officials in Long Beach and Los
Angeles and they have expressed their concerns about this change in
fund allocation.
We need to continue to stay vigilant against terrorists that want
to do our country harm. We need to continue to adequately fund the
programs that have kept our country safe.
Now is not the time to be cutting back funding for law enforcement,
first responders, and community preparedness.
priority #9: native americans
Perhaps nowhere is the need more urgent than in Indian Country,
which is grappling with an average unemployment rate of 22 percent,
which is higher than any state. Addressing the disparities in health
care, education, housing, and crime in Indian Country also remains a
challenge. I therefore am pleased that the President's budget requests
a 2.7% increase for the Indian Health Service, an increase of $116
million over the FY 2012 enacted level. I am also pleased that the
FY2013 request for Indian Affairs focuses on core programs and services
that are vital to Indian country, such as the $345 million for public
safety initiatives in Indian Country.
priority #10: international affairs
Finally, I wish to briefly address the Function 150--International
Affairs budget and say that I strongly support the President's request
for $51.6 billion, a 1.6 percent increase over the current funding
level.
Although America's domestic needs are great, it is in our interest
and consistent with our tradition and character to be engaged in the
world. Whether it is providing diplomatic, development, peacekeeping,
security, and humanitarian assistance, or combating human trafficking
and modern day slavery, American leadership and involvement is
indispensable.
The diplomatic role of the United States in the international
system cannot be understated. By supporting economic development, human
rights, and democracy throughout the world, the International Affairs
Budget is a bargain and one of the best investments we can make.
conclusion
In conclusion, let me say that while a budget is a record of
expenditures, outlays, and revenue receipts, it is much more than that.
It is an expression of our most cherished values, a reflection our
character, and the fulfillment of the social contract among
generations, tying the present to the past and future. In a budget we
commit ourselves to the actions needed to keep faith with our
obligation to our forefathers and to generations unborn to do all we
can to make this a more perfect union. It is in that spirit that I have
suggested the priorities outlined above.
Thank you for listening.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, I appreciate your testimony. The
chair wants to give notice that it is the intention to hear
testimony from the next two members, and then we will likely go
into recess as there will be a vote on the floor. So with that,
you can please keep your comments to five minutes. We will
recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Hultgren, for five
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. RANDY HULTGREN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Mr. Hultgren. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it
is a privilege today to share with you my thoughts on the
president's fiscal 2013 budget request. It comes as no surprise
to anyone that, certainly, to none of the members of this
committee that we must aggressively cut spending, reduce
government liabilities, and prioritize our needs. We must do
that, we must do it well, and we must do it immediately, but I
what I want to talk to you about today is something I think we
conservatives needs to address more frequently: Our national
investment in American scientific enterprise. While the
science, space, and technology committee is only one of my
three committee assignments, I am proud of the role I have
played in strengthening our investment in fundamental science
research and strengthening NASA. I am proud because I truly
believe the story of American exceptionalism is a story of our
investments in basic research and exploration, and I do not
believe that the president's budget takes us there. In fact, I
believe it undercuts that investment.
First, with regard to NASA, the president has decimated our
Mars exploration budget, canceled our plans to return to space
exploration, and left us entirely dependent on the Russians
with no contingency plan, and that is just his proposal for
NASA. His proposal for fundamental science research in our
national labs is even worse.
Now, for the sake of full disclosure, I do have a national
lab in my district, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and
the president has proposed nearly a 10 percent cut to
Fermilab's budget. Fermilab is our nation's only single-purpose
high energy physics lab, and I view the president's request as
a slap in the face of Fermi's legacy of scientific achievement.
Moreover, it is not as if the president is proposing to cut
spending across the board and science and NASA happens to be a
casualty, no. The president is still trying to grow government,
increase spending, by hundreds of billions of dollars. He just
happens to be proposing cuts to one of the few productive areas
of government to pay for some of his expansion, and that is
shameful. It is shameful because high energy physics and our
broader scientific portfolio go beyond parochial interest in
local politics. These endeavors are inextricably linked to both
our national success and fundamentally, our national character.
Unfortunately, in addition to the president proposing cuts
to high energy physics in Fermilab, he has also shown lukewarm
support for the Department of Energy's Office of Science, all
the while his political pet projects like Solyndra-style green
energy gambles receive 30 percent increases; and it is on this
point that I think a constituent physicist of mine phrased it
best: ``Science is divided into Edisonian, the research that
leads to light bulbs and other tangible inventions, and
Einsteinian science, that not only seeks answers to questions
about the nature of our world, but also provokes new
questions.'' American free enterprise and the private sector do
an outstanding job of the Edisonian science, and our national
labs have done an incredible job of the fundamental Einsteinian
science. However, the president's budget sacrifices Einsteinian
science at the political alter of trying to compete with the
private sector and pick market winners.
Mr. Chairman, science requires a certain infrastructure,
and the president's budget undermines the core parts of this
infrastructure, a part of the infrastructure that drives long-
term economic growth and innovation. It is no accident that our
investment in these various NASA and science endeavors in the
1960s and 1970s led to that generation of adolescents creating
companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon in their adult
years. I fear our short-sightedness now will cost us the
leading companies of the future.
The U.S. research system is unique; we found an incredibly
powerful combination wedding education and research by
incorporating universities, user facilities, and Department of
Energy resources. With a pedigree spanning over half a century,
it is self evident that this basic research drives our
understanding of the universe and our economic growth. These
are new ideas and new innovations that spawn new products, new
services, new companies, and new industries, but this system is
only as stable as our commitment to it, which is why sustained
and predictable research funding is crucial. The 2007
reorganization under America Competes was a good first step,
but Congress must redouble its effort to provide a clear,
predictable, long-term path mapping out the seriousness of our
investment. The president's budget represents a backward trend
in these fronts.
With growing competition from overseas and economic
uncertainty here at home, it is more important than ever that
we reinforce our national commitment to basic research, our
long-term success in economic innovation, problem-solving and
inspiring future generations of Americans depends on it. Europe
now leads in physics, China leads in solar technology, India
leads in job creation, and we rely 100 percent on the Russians
to get us into space. To say this concerns me is an
understatement. I believe the seed corn for turning all of this
around is our investment in both basic research and NASA's
exploration. The president's budget request, however, undercuts
both of these activities by serving up our seed corn to his
political base. This is a recipe for failing our future, and we
must not let it happen. Thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Randy Hultgren follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Randall M. Hultgren, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Illinois
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is my privilege today
to share with you my thoughts on the President's Fiscal Year 2013
budget request.
It comes as no surprise to anybody--and certainly to none of the
members of this committee--that we must aggressively cut spending,
reduce government liabilities, and prioritize our needs. We must do
that, we must do it well, and we must do it immediately.
But what I want to talk about to you today is something I think we
Conservatives need to address more frequently; our national investment
in the American scientific enterprise. While the Science, Space and
Technology Committee is only one of my three committee assignments, I
am proud of the role I have played in strengthening our investment in
fundamental science research and strengthening NASA.
I'm proud because I truly believe the story of American
exceptionalism is a story of our investments in basic research and
exploration. And I do not believe that the President's budget takes us
there; in fact, I believe it undercuts that investment.
First, with regard to NASA, the President has decimated our Mars
exploration budget, cancelled our plans to return to space exploration,
and left us entirely dependent on the Russians with no contingency
plans. And that is just his proposal for NASA; his proposal for
fundamental science research and our national labs is even worse.
Now, for the sake of full disclosure, I do have a national lab in
my district, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and the President
has proposed a nearly 10% cut to Fermilab's budget. Fermilab is our
nation's only single purpose high energy physics lab, and I view the
President's request as a slap in the face to Fermi's legacy of
scientific achievement.
Moreover, it's not as if the President is proposing to cut spending
across the board and science and NASA happen to be a casualty; no. The
President is still trying to grow government and increase spending by
hundreds of billions of dollars; he just happens to be proposing cuts
to one of the few productive areas of government to pay for some of his
expansion. And that is shameful.
And it's shameful because High Energy Physics and our broader
scientific portfolio go beyond parochial interests and local politics;
these endeavors are inextricably linked to both our national success
and, fundamentally, our national character. Unfortunately, in addition
to the President proposing cuts to High Energy Physics and Fermilab,
he's also shown lukewarm support for the Department of Energy's Office
of Science, all while his political pet projects like Solyndra style
green energy gambles receive 30% increases.
And it's on this point that I think a constituent physicist of mine
phrased it best: science is divided into ``Edisonian'' science--the
research that leads to light bulbs and other tangible inventions--and
``Einsteinian'' science that not only seeks answers to questions about
the nature of our world, but also provokes new questions.
American free enterprise and the private sector do an outstanding
job of the Edisonian science, and our national labs have done an
incredible job of the fundamental Einsteinian science. However, the
President's budget sacrifices ``Einsteinian'' science at the political
alter of trying to compete with the private sector and pick market
winners.
Mr. Chairman, science requires a certain infrastructure. And the
President's budget undermines the core part of this infrastructure; a
part of the infrastructure that drives long-term economic growth and
innovation. It is no accident that our investments in these various
NASA and science endeavors in the 60s and 70s lead to that generation
of adolescents creating companies like Microsoft, Apple and Amazon in
their adult years. I fear our short sightedness now will cost us the
leading companies of the future.
The U.S. research system is unique. We've found an incredibly
powerful combination, wedding education and research by incorporating
universities, user facilities and Department of Energy resources. With
a pedigree spanning over half a century, it is self-evident that this
basic research drives our understanding of the universe and our
economic growth. These are new ideas and new innovations that spawn new
products, new services, new companies and new industries.
But this system is only as stable as our commitment to it, which is
why sustained and predictable research funding is crucial. The 2007
reorganization under America COMPETES was a good first step, but
Congress must redouble its efforts to provide a clear, predictable,
long-term path mapping out the seriousness of our investment. The
President's budget represents a backward trend in this front.
With growing competition from overseas and economic uncertainty
here at home, it is more important than ever that we reinforce our
national commitment to basic research. Our long-term success in
economic innovation, problem-solving, and inspiring future generations
of Americans depends on it.
Europe now leads us in physics, China leads us in solar technology,
India leads us in job creation, and we rely 100% on the Russians to get
us into space. To say this concerns me is an understatement. I believe
the seed corn for turning all of this around is our investment in both
basic research and NASA's exploration. The President's budget request,
however, undercuts both of those activities.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you. I am actually going to yield to
the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. Ryan of Ohio. I just want to thank the gentleman
because one of the issues we have in this committee that the
chair and myself have had discussions on, and I try to mention,
when I can, is a national narrative that there is not anything
that we can invest in that is necessarily a good thing. So I
think it is important, and I agree with most of what you said,
about how important these investments are in the basic research
and how the private sector can come in and walk through the
garden of research that we do here and fund here, and it helps
them grow and expand.
So I appreciate what you are talking about, and maybe we
can work together to try to get some funding for that
particular project, and maybe other research grants and
formulas and everything else that may get whacked here in the
next few months, so I appreciate what you are saying.
Mr. Hultgren. Thank you very much, and I will reach out to
you and see if there is a way that we can work together on
this.
Mr. Ryan of Ohio. Great.
Mr. Hultgren. Thank you chairman.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, and thank you for your time.
Despite my comments earlier that the House floor now appears to
be in recess until approximately 11:45, so we will continue to
get as much testimony in as we can prior to an anticipated vote
in the range of 11:45. With that, we will recognize the
gentleman from New York, Mr. Owens, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL OWENS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and other members of the
committee who are with us today. I appreciate the opportunity
to address the committee. I appreciate the difficult budget
environment this committee faces, and I am grateful for the
opportunity to speak about an issue that is critically
important, not only to my constituents, but also to this
nation's economic future.
On February 4, 2011, the president and Prime Minister
Harper of Canada announced, Beyond the Border, a shared vision
for perimeter security and economic competitiveness. This
agreement institutionalizes programs that will, in fact, make
our northern border more secure, and at the same time, allow
for the rapid movement of people and goods.
The U.S.-Canada trade relationship represents over $250
billion of direct investment by each country in the other, and
bilateral trade of nearly $700 billion a year in goods and
services. Nearly $1 million in goods and services crosses the
U.S.-Canadian border every minute, as well as 300,000 people
every day. This trade relationship sustains a total of more
than 100,000 jobs in the chairman and ranking member's
congressional districts alone. My congressional district in New
York has 13 ports of entry and border crossings. In fiscal year
2011, these border crossings processed more than half a million
trucks and more than 3 million people from Canada, helping
support more than 19,000 jobs in the region, and over half a
million jobs across New York state.
My point is not merely to rattle off statistics, but to
emphasize the opportunity this committee has to ensure that we
can appropriately implement this agreement, enhance security,
particularly with the location of Fort Drum so close to this
border, as well as to create jobs. As this committee considers
a budget resolution for fiscal year 2013, it is critical that
we provide adequate resources to the Department of Homeland
Security, Department of State, Office of the Director of
National Intelligence, animal and plant health, inspection
service, customs and border protection, food safety and
inspection service, Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Transportation, and the Department of Justice to
carry out the Beyond the Border initiative. Not only did this
agreement have the potential to boost trade with Canada while
creating jobs here at home, it will also ensure that tax payer
money is spent more efficiently and creatively to process
people and goods at the border.
Several major initiatives in the Beyond the Border action
plan that will bolster security and economic growth efforts
include developing a joint Canadian plan for investing in
modern infrastructure and technology at the busiest ports of
entry, which is essential to pursuing creative and effective
solutions to manage the flow of cross-border traffic. A
commitment to utilizing technology and cyber security at small
border crossings so that assets can be redeployed to larger
crossings to facilitate the movement of people and goods, pilot
programs permitting expedited clearance for certain Canadian
food processors and Amtrak passengers, a joint U.S.-Canadian
plan to measure and compare wait times and traffic at the
border, expanded cooperation of our security agencies all along
our border, working towards integrated U.S.-Canada entry-exit
system for people and goods so that entry into one country can
serve to verify exit from the other.
Current joint traveler programs that will be enhanced by
the beyond the border initiative include harmonizing what is
known as the U.S. Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism,
or CTPAT program and the Canadian Partners in Protection or PIP
program, and an expansion of the FAST program which moves
trucks more quickly through our borders. Harmonizing the
Canadian custom self-assessment and U.S. importer self-
assessment programs, expanding a TSA risk-based screening
program so that Canadian NEXUS card holders can move more
quickly through TSA screening locations throughout the United
States, and expanding NEXUS or express lane capacity at border
crossings, in particular at Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, a
Canadian border crossing in Quebec.
These are just a few of the initiatives that the U.S.-
Canadian joint working groups will begin proposing solutions to
in the coming year, ensuring adequate investments in the Beyond
the Border agreement will help boost this nation's exports to
Canada, our biggest trading partner and help ensure our
northern border is more secure. Thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Bill Owens follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. William L. Owens, a Representative in
Congress From the State of New York
Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for the
opportunity to address the committee today. I appreciate the difficult
budget environment this Committee faces, and I'm grateful for the
opportunity to speak about an issue that is critically important not
only to my constituents, but also to this nation's economic recovery.
On February 4, 2011, the President and Prime Minister Harper
announced ``Beyond the Border; A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security
and Economic Competitiveness.'' This agreement institutionalizes
programs that will in fact make our northern border more secure and at
the same time allow for the rapid movement of people and goods.
The U.S.-Canada trade relationship represents over $250 billion of
direct investment by each country in the other and bilateral trade of
nearly $700 billion dollars a year in goods and services. Nearly one
million dollars in goods and services crosses the U.S.-Canada border
every minute as well as 300,000 people every day. This trade
relationship sustains over 300,000 jobs in the Chairman and Ranking
Member's home states of Wisconsin and Maryland alone.
My Congressional District has 13 ports of entry and border
crossings. In fiscal year 2011, these border crossings processed more
than half a million trucks and more than 3 million people from Canada,
helping support more than 19,000 jobs in my Congressional District and
over half a million jobs in New York State.
My point is not merely to rattle off statistics, but to emphasize
the opportunity this Committee has to ensure that we can appropriately
implement this agreement and create jobs. As this Committee considers a
budget resolution for Fiscal Year 2013, it is critical that we provide
adequate resources to the Department of Homeland Security, Department
of State, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Animal and
Plan Health Inspection Service, Customs and Border Protection Food
Safety and Inspection Service, Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice to carry out
the Beyond the Border Initiative. Not only does this agreement have the
potential to boost trade with Canada while creating jobs here at home,
it will also ensure that taxpayer money is spent more efficiently and
creatively to process people and goods at the border.
Several major initiatives in the Beyond the Border Action Plan that
will bolster security and economic growth efforts include:
a. Investing in modern infrastructure and technology at the busiest
ports of entry, which is essential to pursuing creative and effective
solutions to manage the flow of cross-border traffic;
b. A commitment to utilize technology and cyber security for small
border crossings so that assets can be redeployed to larger crossings
to facilitate the movement of people and goods;
c. Pilot programs permitting expedited clearance for certain
Canadian food processors and Amtrak passengers;
d. A joint U.S.-Canada plan to measure and compare wait times and
traffic at the border;
e. Working towards an integrated U.S.-Canada entry-exit system for
people and goods so that entry into one country can serve to verify
exit from the other country. Current joint traveler and trade programs
that will be enhanced by the Beyond the Border Initiative include:
i. Harmonizing the U.S. Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism
(C-TPAT) program and the Canadian Partners in Protection (PIP) program,
and an expansion of the FAST program;
ii. Harmonizing the Canadian Custom Self-Assessment and the U.S.
Importer Self-Assessment programs;
iii. Expanding a TSA risk-based screening program so that Canadian
NEXUS card holders can move more quickly through TSA screening
locations; and
iv. Expanding NEXUS or express lane capacity at border crossings,
in particular the St. Bernard de Lacolle Canadian border crossing in
Quebec.
These are just a few of the initiatives that U.S.-Canada joint
working groups will begin proposing solutions to in the coming year.
Ensuring adequate investments in the Beyond the Border Agreement will
help boost exports to our nation's biggest trading partner and make our
northern border more secure.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the committee, and
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman from New York for his
comments, and we appreciate it. We will now pause, not go into
recess, but pause as we trade out the panels and invite the
members of our next panel to please come forward and take your
seats. I want to let members know that we anticipate that votes
will start at roughly 11:45, and so in the essence of time if
you could keep your verbal comments to five minutes, and we
will submit your full testimony into the record. With that we
will start by recognizing the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr.
Fleischmann, for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you. Members of the Budget
Committee, I thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding
the 2013 budget. I appreciate the hard work ahead of you all
and wish you the best during this challenging process. I will
keep my comments short because I am not here to ask for
additional funding in certain areas, or spending that might
help me with a pet project or a campaign promise. Rather, as a
recently elected member of Congress, I want to stress the
problems of our massive debt and uncontrollable spending and
encourage you to set us on a path to fiscal sustainability and
stress my desire to help with this process.
Most importantly, I wanted to bring some realistic budget
solutions to the committee's attention. As you know well, the
current fiscal outlook is bleak, and has gotten dramatically
worse over the last few years. Our current national debt is $15
trillion, which amounts to almost $50,000 for every man, woman,
and child. This debt is now over 100 percent of our GDP, and
significant amount of this debt is owned by foreign sources,
and the cause of this problem is increased spending, not a lack
of revenue. Since World War II, tax revenues have averaged
about 18 percent of the economy, and these revenues are
predicted to remain at or about that level for the foreseeable
future. During this time, spending has averaged around 20
percent of the economy. However, recently spending has gone
well above this 20 percent average, and is now predicted to
explode to nearly 45 percent of the economy in future years, a
massive and unsustainable increase.
Fortunately, there are common sense steps we can take
immediately to address our fiscal problems. For example, last
month after the president released his 2013 budget, I
introduced the Freeze Government Spending Act of 2012. This
bill is simple, but I believe it represents a realistic,
straightforward approach to controlling discretionary spending.
This bill amends the Budget Control Act of 2011 in a few ways.
First, it takes fiscal year 2013 budget cap of $1 trillion
47 and subtracts the automatic sequestration that will happen
in 2013. This gives us a final budget limit of $949 billion for
2013. This is a 9 percent cut from 2012 and brings us close to
the fiscal year 2008 discretionary level.
My bill then freezes discretionary spending at that 2013
level of $949 billion for nine years while ending the crippling
defense cuts imposed by sequestration. Since Congress has
already agreed to live within the 2013 spending level, it seems
logical that we can simply live within that limit for an
additional eight years. This seems especially reasonable when
we are spending more money that we simply do not have, and the
budgetary impact of this freeze will be significant. It will
save us roughly $850 billion over 10 years versus the Budget
Control Act. When interest savings is included, we are close to
$1 trillion in savings. Again, all of this accomplished by
simply freezing spending.
In addition to this big picture budget bill, I have
introduced legislation to eliminate a program that is
needlessly costing tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars.
The Stop Green Initiative Abuse Act of 2011 would eliminate the
flawed weatherization assistance program which has been ripe
with substantial problems in recent years. In fact, both the
Tennessee Comptroller General's office and the Department of
Energy inspector general's office have studied the program and
found significant fraud and abuse. Elimination of this
duplicative program could save us $2 billion over 10 years. I
bring this to the committee's attention because if every member
of Congress could find just one similar wasteful program to
eliminate, we would be on the right track to getting our fiscal
house in order. A billion here and a billion there can add up
to significant savings.
When I came here last here, I wanted to be part of the
solution to our fiscal problems, and I wanted to do more than
simply cast votes. I wanted to bring real, positive proposals
to the table. I hope these ideas will be helpful to the
committee, and I thank you for your time. In addition, I stand
ready to work with you and all our colleagues to address our
country's fiscal problems, thank you.
[The prepared statement of Chuck Fleischmann follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Charles J. ``Chuck'' Fleischmann, a
Representative in Congress From the State of Tennessee
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen and members of the Budget
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding the 2013
budget. I appreciate the hard work ahead of you and wish you the best
during this challenging process.
I will keep my comments short because I am not here to ask for
additional funding in certain areas or spending that might help with a
pet project or a campaign promise. Rather, as a recently elected Member
of Congress, I want to stress the problems of our massive debt and
uncontrollable spending, encourage you to set us on a path to fiscal
sustainability, and stress my desire to help with this process. Most
importantly, I wanted to bring some realistic budget solutions to the
committee's attention.
As you know well, the current fiscal outlook is bleak, and it has
gotten dramatically worse over the last few years. Our current national
debt is $15 trillion which amounts to almost $50,000 for every man,
woman, and child. This debt is now over 100% of our GDP, and
significant amount of that debt is owned by foreign sources.
And the cause of this problem is increased spending, not a lack of
revenue. Since World War II tax revenues have averaged about 18 percent
of the economy and these revenues are predicted to remain at about that
level for the foreseeable future. During this time spending has
averaged around 20 percent of the economy. However, recently spending
has gone well above this 20 percent average, and it is now predicted to
explode to nearly 45% of the economy in future years--a massive and
unsustainable increase.
Mr. Chairman, fortunately there are common-sense steps we can take
to immediately address our fiscal problems. For example, last month,
after the president released his 2013 budget, I introduced the Freeze
Government Spending Act of 2012. This bill is simple, but I believe
represents a realistic, straight forward approach to controlling
discretionary spending. The bill amends the Budget Control Act of 2011
in a few ways. First, it takes the fiscal year 2013 budget cap of $
1.047 trillion and subtracts the automatic sequestration that will
happen in January 2013. This gives us a final budget limit of $949
billion for 2013. This is a 9% cut from 2012 and brings us close to the
fiscal year 2008 discretionary level. My bill then freezes
discretionary spending at that 2013 level of $949 billion for 9 years
while ending the crippling defense cuts imposed by sequestration.
Since Congress has already agreed to live within the 2013 spending
level, it seems logical that we can simply live within that limit for
an additional eight years. This seems especially reasonable when we are
spending money that we simply do not have. And the budgetary impact of
this freeze will be significant. It will save us roughly $850 billion
over 10 years versus the Budget Control Act. When interest savings is
included, we are close to $ 1 trillion in savings. Again, all of this
is accomplished by simply freezing spending.
In addition to this big picture budget bill, I have introduced
legislation to eliminate a program that is needlessly costing taxpayers
hundreds of millions of dollars. The Stop Green Initiative Abuse Act of
2011 would eliminate the flawed Weatherization Assistance Program which
has been ripe with substantial problems in recent years. In fact, both
the Tennessee Comptroller General's office and the Department of
Energy's Inspector General's office have studied the program and found
significant fraud and abuse. Elimination of this duplicative program
could save us $2 billion over ten years.
I bring this to the Committee's attention because if every member
of Congress could find just one similar wasteful program to eliminate,
we would be on the right track to getting our fiscal house in order. A
billion here and a billion there can add up to significant savings.
Mr. Chairman, when I came here last year, I wanted to be part of
the solution to our fiscal problems, and I wanted to do more than
simply cast votes. I wanted to bring real, positive proposals to the
table. I hope these ideas are helpful to the committee, and I thank you
for your time. In addition, I stand ready to work with you and all our
colleagues to address our country's fiscal problems. Thank you.
Mr. Chaffetz. I thank the gentleman for his testimony. We
will now recognize the Honorable Martha Roby of Alabama for
five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA ROBY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA
Ms. Roby. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and your
colleagues for your hard work so far on the federal budget
issues of the 112th Congress, and you have before you the
difficult task of meeting our nation's priorities, curbing an
inflated budget, and bringing down the deficit. It is an
important endeavor that will have a clear and direct impact on
the future strength of this great nation. So I thank you for
this opportunity to testify today.
I want to express briefly my concerns regarding the
practice of using budget gimmicks to distort the truth about
federal spending. At times both Congress and the president have
exploited these institutional loopholes to create false
savings. Without a doubt, we know that Republicans and
Democrats have relied on these tricks to skew the numbers.
These gimmicks deeply ingrained in the rules of the budget and
appropriations process have led to the erosion of confidence in
our government and its leaders. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, The
whole art of government consist in the art of being honest. I
believe that all of you on this committee agree that the
American people deserve a budget system that is real, genuine,
and authentic, and the only way to guarantee the truth is to
root out and end the wasteful gimmicks that obscure it.
As you know, last October Senator Jeff Sessions, the
ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, introduced the
Honest Budget Act of 2011. The legislation, which is currently
pending in the Senate, addresses the nine most commonly used
budget gimmicks and accounting tricks. Senator Sessions'
legislation would strengthen the Senate's rules to provide
budget-minded members more procedural power to block the abuse
of these gimmicks.
Earlier this year I, with many of my freshman Republican
colleagues, introduced the Honest Budget Act of 2012, and our
legislation, based on Senator Sessions' bill, expands this
common sense approach to the House of Representatives. Like its
Senate counterpart, the legislation empowers rank and file
members to weed out the use of deceitful budget distortions. I
would like to discuss briefly, and I know my time is limited, a
few of the budget gimmicks addressed in the Honest Budget Act,
and my hope is that this committee will keep these concerns in
mind as it works through this year's proposed budget. No budget
means no appropriations.
If the bill requires that the Senate have a budget before
approving any annual appropriations bills, and this seems like
common sense, but we are all keenly aware of the amount of time
that has passed, well over 1,000 days, since the Senate has
passed a budget. So this is a very commonsensical request that
we must actually pass a budget before we appropriate money.
This is a basic requirement of government, and until that
threshold is met, no money should be spent. No phony emergency
and disaster designation.
This second provision makes it difficult to use the often-
abused emergency or disaster designation, and as you know,
designating funding as disaster or emergency spending generally
means it is off budget. In other words, it is deficit spending.
So this practice has also become routine and commonplace, and
while true emergencies do exist, the overwhelming majority of
federal spending is anticipated, and therefore should be
included in the budget.
Unfortunately, Congress has fallen into the habit of simply
declaring that which cannot afford to be an emergency, and so
when it does, it uses borrowed funds to pay the bill, and that
practice also must end.
Accurate scoring of home loan guarantees, and I am pleased
that this committee and the full House of Representatives
recently approved legislation that is substantially similar to
this provision in the Honest Budget Act.
No faults rescissions: At times, Congress may legitimately
rescind appropriated funds to use for other priorities, but too
often Congress makes phony rescissions that look good on paper,
but in reality only create the illusion of savings. Again, this
bill goes through the nine most commonly used budget gimmicks
and I have highlighted more of them in my written testimony,
and it is my hope that this committee will take a really good,
hard look when it comes to budget reform and the
institutionalized practices, again, of both Republicans and
Democrats that we will take this opportunity to reform these
practices so that we can be honest with the American people.
Thank you again for the committee's work and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Martha Roby follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Martha Roby, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Alabama
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and your colleagues for your hard
work so far on federal budget issues in the 112th Congress. You have
before you the difficult task of meeting our nation's priorities,
curbing an inflated federal budget, and bringing down the deficit. It
is an important endeavor that will have a clear and direct impact on
the future strength of our great nation.
Thank you also for this opportunity to testify today.
I want to express briefly my concern regarding the practice of
using budget gimmicks to distort the truth about federal spending. At
times, both Congress and the President have exploited these
institutional loopholes to create false savings. Without a doubt, we
know that both Republicans and Democrats have relied on these tricks to
skew the numbers. These gimmicks--deeply engrained in the rules of the
budget and appropriations process--have led to the erosion of
confidence in our government and its leaders.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote, ``The whole art of government consists
in the art of being honest.'' I believe all of you agree that the
American people deserve a budget system that is real, genuine, and
authentic. And the only way to guarantee the truth is to root out and
end the gimmicks that obscure it.
As many of you know, last October Senator Jeff Sessions, the
Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, introduced the Honest
Budget Act of 2011. The legislation, which is currently pending in the
Senate, addresses nine of the most commonly used budget gimmicks and
accounting tricks. Senator Sessions' legislation would strengthen the
Senate's rules to provide budget-minded members more procedural power
to block the abuse of these gimmicks.
Earlier this year, I--with many of my freshman Republican
colleagues--introduced the Honest Budget Act of 2012. Our legislation,
based on Senator Sessions' bill, expands this common sense approach to
the House of Representatives. Like its Senate counterpart, the
legislation empowers rank-and-file members to weed out the use of
deceitful budget distortions.
I'd like to discuss briefly just a few of the budget gimmicks
addressed in the Honest Budget Act. My hope is that this Committee will
keep these concerns in mind as it works on the Fiscal Year 2013 Budget.
no budget means no appropriations
First, the Honest Budget Act calls for the Senate to have a budget
before approving any of the annual appropriation bills. This seems like
commonsense, but each of us is aware that the Senate has not passed a
budget in well over 1,000 days. In fact, Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid has said that there is no need to pass a budget this year due to
the Budget Control Act. I consider that statement to be a failure of
leadership. Passage of a budget is extremely important to provide a
framework for controlled federal spending. It is, in fact, a basic
requirement of government. Until that threshold is met, no money should
be spent.
no phony emergency and disaster designation
The second provision would make it more difficult to use the often-
abused emergency or disaster designation. As you know, designating
funding as emergency spending generally means it is ``off-budget''--in
other words, it is deficit spending. This practice has become routine
and commonplace. While true emergencies do exist, the overwhelming
majority of federal spending is anticipated and, therefore, should be
included in the budget. Unfortunately, Congress has fallen into the
habit of simply declaring that which it cannot afford to be an
emergency. When it does so, it uses borrowed funds to pay the bill.
That practice must end.
accurate scoring of home loan guarantees
I am pleased that this Committee and the full House of
Representatives recently approved legislation that is substantially
similar to a provision in the Honest Budget Act.
Section 4 of the Honest Budget Act would strengthen the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990. In that vein the House passed H.R. 3581, the
Budget and Accounting Transparency Act of 2011 on February 7, 2012. The
bill, like the provisions in the Honest Budget Act, ensures that the
Congressional Budget Office more realistically score government-
sponsored home loan guarantees by considering the market risk
associated to them. I thank the Members of the Committee in recognizing
the importance of this reform.
no false rescissions
At times, Congress may legitimately rescind appropriated funds to
use for other priorities. Too often, however, Congress makes phony
rescissions that look good on paper but, in reality, only create the
illusion of savings. When those false savings are spent elsewhere, the
net effect is an increase in the debt.
Congress must stop using rescinded money that was never going to be
spent in the first place as ``savings.'' These are not true savings.
Mr. Chairman, these are just a few basic examples of the nine
budget gimmicks that the Honest Budget Act addresses. Together, these
gimmicks have cost the taxpayer more than $423 billion since 2005,
including more than $73 billion last year.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important
subject.
I strongly support passage of the Honest Budget Act in its entity,
and I welcome any future hearings this Committee may hold to examine
its provisions. That said, I believe that a great deal of good would
result from the Budget Committee adopting the underlying principles of
this legislation while it considers the President's budget proposal and
begins work on a House budget resolution.
Mr. Chairman, I know that you share my belief that a budget, at its
core, must be an honest financial accounting to the American People. I
urge this Committee to reject the past practices of the Obama
Administration and Congress, and to make a commitment to an open,
transparent, and accurate budget. This, I believe, is the first step to
restoring integrity and honesty to this process.
Thank you.
Mr. Chaffetz. Thank you, I appreciate your testimony and
your passion behind these issues. So thank you for your
testimony. We will now recognize, for five minutes, the
Honorable Michael Burgess of Texas. The gentleman is now
recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL BURGESS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Burgess. I thank the chairman. I thank you for having
this series of hearings. I try to participate every year
because I do believe it is an important part of the process. As
you know, all too well, the method of funding critical programs
year over year involves using what are called budget cliffs or
funding cliffs, and unfortunately, all of those cans that have
been kicked down the road all come to an abrupt stop on
December 31 of this year, and we are all aware of that. At the
same time, there is a possibility that the statutory authority
for borrowing of the United States of America will once again
be at its limit, and the president or the secretary of Treasury
may well, after election day, submit a request to Congress that
this issue be dealt with. Many people describe December as the
perfect budgetary storm. They may be correct.
In medicine, we have a term called compression of
morbidities. You hear people talk about preventive care and we
all want to live longer and healthier, but we all know we
cannot live forever, and the term compression of morbidities
refers to the things that happen to you during that last little
bit of life that is left for you, and we all want to live well
up until that kicks in. We are coming up on a budgetary
compression of morbidities this December. The bad part about
compression of morbidities is, as I point out, it usually
occurs right before the end of life. I hope it is not before
the end of life for this august institution, but you do have to
worry if the institution itself will be able to survive some of
the rigors with which it is going to be confronted at the end
of this year, which is why I urge you. I do not come here
telling you that I have answers for these problems, but I do
urge you to take, both the short term, the medium term, and the
long term look in your budget process. We have got an immediate
problem to deal with in December, and obviously, the years
afterward do not get subsequently easier just by definition.
Now, the health care law, the Affordable Care Act, that was
passed two years ago this month, in fact, signed into law two
years ago this month, there is an absolutely critical example
of how bad things are, and most of us do not realize how bad
they are getting. Secretary Sebelius came and testified to our
Committee on Energy And Commerce, the hill subcommittee, and in
her budgetary request was the acknowledgment that for the next
10 years, they are going to be spending $111 billion more than
they suggested when they came in with the president's budget
last year. When asked why and how can the secretary's budget
increase by $111 billion, and how can the projections go up by
that much, how could you be off by that much. As typical, she
did not give a direct response, but rather there were some
legislative things that happened, and I presume that is the
CLASS Act, and there were some other projections that did not
hold true. More people on Medicaid, perhaps that is the case,
but of course Medicaid and subsidies in the exchange, all of
that people have recognized from the very beginning, that is
going to be a malleable number, but $111 billion for what
remains of the 10 year budgetary window? That seemed a little
hard to swallow, and it seemed a little hard to believe, and
again, the secretary did not have a good answer for that.
One of the other things that I struggle with all the time,
is the fact that we reduce reimbursement to physicians in the
Medicare program. We all know the Medicare program is
struggling; we all know that it desperately needs reform. This
committee stepped up to the plate a year ago, and provided us
some sensible thoughts on this. Sustainable growth rate is
another one of those things that falls off the cliff in
December. I urge this committee to take into account the
problems that we are going to encounter with a sustainable
growth rate formula because we do have physicians across the
country today where Medicare does not even reimbursement the
cost of delivering the care, and while these doctors are
altruistic and they want to do the right thing for America's
seniors, as business people they may not be able to justify
their continued participation in this government program.
Finally, with a look to the future, I would ask, and I know
this committee has worked on it before because I have testified
before this committee in 2004 and 2005 on fundamental tax
reform. I come from a part of the world, my predecessor wrote a
book on the flat tax, I believe in the flat tax, I think it is
a worthwhile exercise. I have introduced legislation for an
optional flat tax that people could opt in to if they want to
get out of the code. It is HR 1040, cleverly enough, and I
would urge the committee to look at that when they are
considering options for fundamental tax reform because we all
know that is going to have to happen and going to need to be
part of the process going forward. I thank the committee for
the time and attention, I will yield back.
[The prepared statement of Michael Burgess follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael C. Burgess, M.D., a Representative
in Congress From the State of Texas
Chairman Ryan, thank you for allowing me to speak before your
committee.
In your budget resolution, there are several items I hope you will
include. First and very importantly, the funding and implementation of
the health care law must be addressed. As I am sure you agree, we
cannot afford to spend any money on the implementation of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act. It has already proven to paralyze
job growth while also increasing premiums for America's families.
The law is also affecting states which are unsure if this law will
withstand legal challenges. Funding by states and the federal
government to implement the changes should be withheld until the legal
status of this law is settled. My desire would be to see this law's
funding be addressed in a way that best helps American doctors and
patients by reducing the bill's influence over our health care system
and economy. Any spending that can be touched, mandatory or
discretionary, needs to be examined.
Another item to be addressed is the Sustainable Growth Rate, also
known as SGR. This patch must be repealed to create a permanent system
for Medicare reimbursement for our nation's medical system. The current
payment system is not only unsustainable, it is unreliable. Continuing
to operate on short term fixes puts our most vulnerable Americans in a
perilous situation. Their ability to access care is becoming more
difficult. In my home state of Texas just last year, 69% of providers
cited cash flow problems resulting from back payments from the
government. The longer we procrastinate on this problem, the more
costly it will become.
Equally as important is the federal government's revenue and
spending provided by our tax system. Many in Washington have discussed
fundamental tax reform but I am here today with a specific proposal. My
bill, H.R. 1040, the Freedom Flat Tax, is a common sense alternative to
the burdensome tax filing system we have today. Allowing taxpayers to
pay a flat rate of tax on their income with only a standard deduction
will eliminate some of the six billion hours Americans spend each year
preparing their tax returns.
This proposal is just one idea we can use in changing our
ineffective and unfair tax system. I am willing to discuss any idea
that makes filing simpler and creates fewer distortions in economic
choices.
I look forward to this committee approaching these problems with
determined, comprehensive, and intelligent alternatives.
Thank you.
Mr. Chaffetz. We thank the gentleman for his testimony. We
do have a vote on the floor. I think we do have time. We have
13 minutes left on the clock on the vote and with your
testimony anticipated at five minutes, I think we should be
just fine.
STATEMENT OF HON. AL GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Al Green of Texas. I assure you, Mr. Chairman, I shall
not go longer than the 13 minutes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, it is a honor to have
this opportunity to testify. I thank you and the ranking member
as well. Much of what I will say is rooted in something that
occurred in 1968. As you know, we lost a great noble American
in 1968, the Honorable Dr. Martin Luther King. After his
untimely demise, we had the passing of the Fair Housing Act.
That Fair Housing Act has caused us to generate some additional
legislation. I want to talk to you today about three different
programs that I believe to be of significant benefit to us. As
you know, Dr. King reminded us that the arc of the moral
universe is long, but it bends toward justice, and today I am
here to ask that we continue to bend the arc of the moral
universe toward justice.
I would first like to talk to you about a counseling
program. This counseling program will help persons to stay in
their homes. This counseling program is one that was zeroed out
in 2011; however, in 2012 we did add $45 million to it, and the
president is currently, for fiscal year 2013, asking for $55
million. My request is that we take it to $87.5 million.
We have a lot of people who are underwater. We have 11
million homes, and that is about 22 percent of the households,
with a mortgage on them, that are currently underwater. We have
about 2.5 million foreclosures that took place between 2007 and
2009. We got about 5.7 million additional homes that may go
into foreclosure, so this is something that can be of great
benefit, not only to the people who will actually avoid the
foreclosure, but also people who are buying homes, and to the
economy because it can help us to stabilize our economy.
Another program that I would like to mention to you,
quickly, is the Fair Housing Initiative Program. You and I
know, Mr. Chairman, that we still have some discrimination in
our country, and what we want to do is root it out. You and I
stand for the same principles when it comes to this; we want to
root it out. To root it out, you have to have empirical
evidence of the existence. The empirical evidence that we need
to root out and to make people aware, many are not, of their
actions is through the FHIP program, the Fair Housing
Initiative Program. This is simply where NGOs, working with
HUD, will go out into various communities and they will do
something no one has tested. Testing allows us to send persons,
many of whom are qualified, and let them have an opportunity to
apply for housing. If they do not get it, then that tells us
something, but testing has to be followed up with other things.
So my point is I think that we need to continue this
program and this program was funded in 2012 at $42.5 million.
The president is asking for $41.1 million, I am asking that we
continue at the $42.5 million level because the circumstances
have not diminished to the extent that we should diminish the
amount that we spend to root out this scourge of our time and
all time, discrimination.
I would also add this, Mr. Chairman. Much of the
discrimination that we are talking about, in fact empirical
evidence suggests that most discrimination now exists against
persons who are handicapped, and that then means that many of
our veterans are going to be discriminated against, and are
being discriminated against. There is actual, empirical
evidence of veterans being discriminated against because
persons do not know that it is a veteran that they are talking
to or working with, and these veterans, when they are coming
back from Iraq, a good many of them will not return as they
left. I thank God that they were willing to serve their
country, but I also think that we must thank them by making
sure that they can get adequate housing.
I would add one other thing. Discrimination against
veterans takes place with what we call service animals. There
are many people who see them as pets when they are actually
service animals there to aid and assist our veterans, so this
program has great benefits and I am asking that we continue it
at the level that we have.
Now, the HUD-VASH program: I am sure that this is something
that we can all agree we have to do as much as we can with.
This is for our veterans, our Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing program. This program helps us to give the equivalent
of a Section 8 voucher to a veteran. That veteran can take that
voucher and go into the marketplace and if they have additional
money, add it to it, and have housing for the family. Again,
returning home, our veterans merit the opportunity to have
affordable housing. The program was funded in 2012 at $75
million. The president is asking for $75 million, and I am
asking that we maintain that $75 million request.
Finally, we have a piece of legislation, HR 3298, Homes for
Heroes. The Homes for Heroes Bill is budget neutral; it places
a person in HUD whose sole responsibility is to monitor
homelessness among our veterans, to check on them, find out
what is happening with them, acquire empirical evidence and
bring that back to Congress on an annual basis so that we can
do what is necessary to get every veteran off of the streets.
This is something that we owe them.
I thank you, I know that my time is up, but you have been
very generous. I thank you for the time, and I will close
simply with this. Kennedy, Kennedy and King are two of my
favorites, in his inaugural address, his last words were, Here
on Earth, God's work must truly be our own. This is an
opportunity for us to do God's work. I beg that we do what we
can to help homeless people, many of whom are veterans, and
also protect those who might seek some sort of homeless
circumstance and be discriminated against. Thank you very much
Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Al Green follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Al Green, a Representative in Congress From
the State of Texas
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and members of the House
Committee on the Budget, thank you for affording me the opportunity to
share with you a number of budget priorities that I believe to be
crucial for FY 2013. While there are numerous federal programs that I
believe deserve our support, I will limit my comments to housing
programs that are especially important as more American soldiers return
home and American families continue to face the ongoing foreclosure
crisis--specifically, the HUD Housing Assistance Program Counseling
Program, the Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP), and the HUD-VA
Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) Program
housing counseling assistance program
There should be little disagreement that our country is still
recovering from the economic crisis. One need only to look at our
housing market to see that we are still navigating a devastating
foreclosure crisis.
The HUD Housing Counseling Assistance Program was developed to
address the housing counseling needs of working families and seniors.
It is the only federal program that provides explicit support for
families and individuals who are purchasing their first home. More
importantly, housing counseling can often times be the difference
between keeping a family in their homes and foreclosure.
It has been a few years since the housing market collapsed.
Millions of Americans have lost their homes; and millions more are at
risk of losing theirs, as housing prices fall and negative equity
continues to grow. While there may be no panacea or quick-fix to our
housing market, robust housing counseling is most certainly an
important piece of a comprehensive strategy to address the foreclosure
crisis. By providing direct counseling for homeowners who are
delinquent, or at risk of becoming delinquent on their mortgage
payments, fewer foreclosures may occur. Also, for potential homeowners,
housing counseling can help families make the right decisions about
sustaining homeownership, which in turn can also reduce the likelihood
of foreclosure.
In FY 2011, I believe we made a mistake in cutting all funding for
the Housing Counseling Assistance Program at HUD--Congress rectified
this by securing $45 million in FY 2012. Despite this restored funding
level, back in FY 2010, Congress recognized the need for these
important services and appropriated $87.5 million for housing
counseling. I believe we should restore funding levels to their FY 2010
levels of $87.5 million in FY 2013.
fair housing initiatives program (fhip)
Despite the passage of the Fair Housing Act over 40 years ago,
housing discrimination continues to be prevalent today. According to
the National Fair Housing Alliance, approximately four million fair
housing violations occur every year. Just a few short years ago, we
witnessed as predatory, subprime lending targeted communities of color
to devastating effect. Subsequently, as we continue to contend with the
foreclosure crisis and families lose their homes; more Americans are
entering the rental market. According to a recent Department of Housing
and Urban Development report, a record number of Americans are
reporting incidents of housing discrimination, with disability and race
as the leading reasons for filing a complaint. It is for this reason
that we must support the Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP).
FHIP is a program that provides funding for non-profit, fair
housing organizations so that they are able to partner with HUD to help
enforce fair housing laws. These fair housing organizations are the
only private organizations in the country that educate the community
and the housing industry, filing suits to challenge fair housing
violations. These organizations fill a gap in investigating fair
housing violations that ultimately save the government money.
In FY 2012, Congress appropriated $42.5 million for FHIP. I support
continuing to fund the program at this level.
hud-vash
On any night, over 600,000 persons are homeless in the United
States. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs reports that throughout
the year, approximately 134,000 veterans will experience homelessness.
Moreover, only eight percent of the general population are veterans
status, but veterans make up over sixteen percent of the homeless
population.
HUD-VASH is the only program that supports the permanent housing
and rehabilitation of homeless veterans. HUD-VASH is a joint HUD and VA
initiative that provides specially designated Section 8 housing choice
vouchers, case management, and supportive services to homeless
veterans. Vouchers are used to assist with the payment of rent for
veterans and their families. By combining access to affordable housing
and supportive services, the HUD-VASH program assists veterans who
might be at risk of becoming homeless, transition into stable
conditions that allow them to become active participants in their
communities.
The President's FY 2013 budget has requested $75 million for the
HUD-VASH program. I firmly believe we should support this figure, as it
would provide approximately 10,000 additional vouchers for our
veterans. It is worth noting that for FY 2012, Congress also
appropriated $75 million for HUD-VASH. With 10,000 more vouchers
secured, the total number of HUD-VASH vouchers appropriated would stand
at approximately 58,500 vouchers since FY 2008.
While we in Congress may have differing views on various issues,
and bipartisanship agreement has become increasingly difficult to
reach, both Democrats and Republicans have demonstrated their
commitment to our veterans--we should do all that we can to continue
this hard work to end homelessness amongst veterans.
Thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to testify.
Mr. Chaffetz. We thank the gentleman from Texas for his
passion on this issue, and thank you for your testimony today.
This committee will stand in recess as we have a vote on the
floor and we will resume subject to the call of the chair, and
after the conclusion of the votes on the floor. We stand in
recess.
[Whereupon, at 12:00 p.m., the committee recessed, to
reconvene at 1:06 p.m., the same day.]
AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr. Lankford. The hearing comes to order. Mr. Hoyer, I
think you are first up.
STATEMENT OF HON. STENY HOYER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Mr. Hoyer. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and let me
say how pleased I am that my dear friend and colleague from
Maryland and ranking member, Mr. Van Hollen, is also here, and
I thank him for that. I thank you, Mr. Lankford.
Our budget, as all of us know, reflect our values and the
direction we want for this country in the year ahead, and for
several years beyond. With our economic recovery gathering
momentum, we ought to ensure that our budget for fiscal year
2013 strengthens the recovery and helps American business to
create jobs and grow our middle class.
Last week, I spoke about why we need a comprehensive
deficit reduction agreement citing its potential to stimulate
our economy. Setting our economy back on a sustainable,
predictable fiscal path, I said, will help us create jobs by
restoring certainty for businesses, enabling them to plan for a
future without the brinksmanship that has characterized this
Congress. Without certainty, businesses can only focus on the
short term, which leads to missed opportunities for growth and
fewer investments that have wider economic benefits.
Today, Mr. Chairman and ranking member and Mr. Honda, I
want to discuss steps we ought to be taking in our budget that
parallel this necessary deficit reduction effort to ensure
sustained economic growth in the future. The present budget
proposal emphasized the need to invest in manufacturing as a
way to strengthen our long term competitiveness; he spent a
significant time on that. The budget recommendations he
proposed include a number of items from House Democrats Make It
In America plan. I believe that, and many other members
believe, those provisions ought to be contained in the House
budget.
Make It In America includes comprehensive business tax
reform as a means towards bringing investment and jobs back to
the United States. Today, America's tax code is complicated and
inefficient as we all know. Too often, businesses make
decisions based on the best tax outcome and not the best
economic or business outcome. By lowering rates and reducing
preferences, the president's budget proposal promotes reform
that simplifies the tax code, brings jobs back, and encourages
domestic manufacturing and innovation. I believe these
proposals are positive steps towards a greater competitiveness
for our manufacturers. Innovation is central to make it in
America, and our budget ought to include investments in
maintaining our edge in research and development, particularly
in advanced manufacturing.
Among the priorities I wish to see is an increase in the
budget for federal agencies that conduct research and work to
support scientific investigation at our nation's colleges and
universities, including the National Science Foundation, the
Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, or ARPA-E. The
president's proposal would fund manufacturing R&D programs at
$2.2 billion, a level I support. Other provisions that ought to
make into the House budget include the creation of a national
network for manufacturing innovation, as well as investments in
the development of advanced vehicle technologies that will
contribute to energy independence.
Make It In America is also about enhancing public education
and workforce investment. I strongly support budget provisions
that will strengthen our community colleges, and help them
establish programs with local manufacturers, so our students
can learn critical skills needed by employers and transition
into quality jobs. Our budget ought to continue making higher
education affordable for all, including students from low-
income families by sustaining Pell grants at least at the
current levels of $5,635.
In fiscal year 2013, our public education system deserves
investments that enable teachers to prepare their students to
achieve no matter what careers they pursue. Our Make It In
America plan also invests in rebuilding this country's
crumbling infrastructure and laying the groundwork for future
by building new roads, railways, seaports, airports, and energy
projects so that businesses can power their facilities and
easily move their products across the country and around the
world. We can achieve this through the establishment of a
national infrastructure bank, which will leverage public and
private capital to finance large-scale projects. The president
has proposed this and our colleague Rosa Delauro has for many
years. We can advance clean energy production by supporting
domestically manufactured technologies that generate power and
improve energy efficiency.
Finally, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Van Hollen, our budget ought
to help us level the playing field for American workers and
businesses by providing incentives for insourcing and
supporting programs that help increase exports.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you again for the opportunity
to discuss these priorities with you which are not only mine,
but are shared by many members, and by a large number of
Americans. Our budget ought to be a vehicle for achieving the
goal of getting our economy back on track. Make it in America
can help us not only jump start our economy, but also restore
faith in the American dream our economy has long made possible.
I thank you for this opportunity to appear before you.
[The prepared statement of Steny Hoyer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Steny Hoyer, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Maryland
Thank you, Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for this
opportunity. Our budgets reflect our values and the direction we want
for this country in the year ahead--and for several years beyond. With
our economic recovery gathering momentum, we ought to ensure that our
budget for Fiscal Year 2013 strengthens that recovery and helps
American businesses create jobs that grow our middle class.
Last week, I spoke about why we need a comprehensive deficit
reduction agreement, citing its potential to stimulate our economy.
``Setting our economy back on a sustainable, predictable fiscal path,''
I said, ``will help us create jobs by restoring certainty for
businesses and enabling them to plan for a future without the
brinksmanship that has characterized this Congress. Without certainty,
businesses can only focus on the short-term, which leads to missed
opportunities for growth and fewer investments that have wider economic
benefits.'' Today I want to discuss steps we ought to be taking in our
budget that parallel this necessary deficit reduction effort to ensure
sustained economic growth into the future.
The President's budget proposal emphasized the need to invest in
manufacturing as a way to strengthen our long-term competitiveness. The
budget recommendations he proposed include a number of items from House
Democrats' Make It In America plan that I believe--and I know many
other members believe--ought to be contained in the House budget.
Make It In America includes comprehensive business tax reform as a
means toward bringing investment and jobs back to the United States.
Today, America's tax code is complicated and inefficient. Too often,
businesses make decisions based on the best tax outcome and not the
best economic or business outcome. By lowering rates and reducing
preferences, the President's budget proposal promotes reform that
simplifies the tax code, brings jobs back, and encourages domestic
manufacturing and innovation. I believe those proposals are positive
steps toward a greater competitiveness for our manufacturers.
Innovation is central to Make It In America, and our budget ought
to include investments in maintaining our edge in research and
development, particularly in advanced manufacturing. Among the
priorities I wish to see is an increase in the budgets for federal
agencies that conduct research and work to support scientific
investigation at our nation's colleges and universities, including the
National Science Foundation and the Advanced Research Projects Agency
for Energy--or ARPA-E. The President's proposal would fund
manufacturing R&D programs at $2.2 billion, a level I support. Other
provisions that ought to make it into the House budget include the
creation of a national network for manufacturing innovation as well as
investments in the development of advanced vehicle technologies that
will contribute to energy independence.
Make It In America is also about enhancing public education and
workforce investment. I strongly support budget provisions that will
strengthen our community colleges and help them establish programs with
local manufacturers so our students can learn critical skills needed by
employers and transition into quality jobs. Our budget ought to
continue making higher education affordable for all, including students
from low-income families, by sustaining Pell grants at least at the
current $5,635 level for next year. In Fiscal Year 2013, our public
education system deserves investments that enable teachers to prepare
their students to achieve no matter what careers they pursue.
Our Make It In America plan also invests in rebuilding this
country's crumbling infrastructure and laying the groundwork for future
growth by building new roads, railways, seaports, airports, and energy
projects so that businesses can power their facilities and easily move
their products across the country and around the world. We can achieve
this through the establishment of a national infrastructure bank, which
will leverage public and private capital to finance large-scale
projects. We can advance clean energy production by supporting
domestically manufactured technologies that generate power and improve
energy efficiency.
Finally, our budget ought to help us level the playing field for
American workers and businesses by providing incentives for insourcing
and supporting programs that help increase exports.
I thank you again for the opportunity to discuss these priorities
with you, which are not only mine but are shared by many members and by
a large number of Americans. Our budget ought to be a vehicle for
achieving the goal of getting our economy back on track. Make It In
America can help us not only jumpstart our economy but also restore
faith in the American Dream our economy has long made possible.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you, Mr. Hoyer.
Mr. Van Hollen. Mr. Chairman, I want to first of all
welcome our distinguished whip, Mr. Hoyer, here today as long
as well as our other colleagues who will be introduced in a
moment, but before Mr. Hoyer leaves, first I just want to
commend you, Mr. Hoyer, on your focus on Make It In America,
investing in the economic strength of our country. You have
been talking about this for a very long time. We are pleased to
see it reflected in the president's budget with some of the
priorities that you mention.
I have one question because you have also been at the
forefront of among those who say we need to reduce our deficit
over the long term and we need to do it in a balanced way. If
you could just talk about the importance of having a balanced
approach so that we can actually accomplish some deficit
reduction in the country.
Mr. Hoyer. Thank you Chris for that question. I also want
to thank my colleague, Mr. Van Hollen, for the efforts that he
has pursued to get us to a balanced, sustainable plan for our
budget and for the growth of our economy. Obviously, in the
short term, we must grow jobs. That is why I am focusing this
statement on growing the economy. We will not balance our
budget if we do not grow jobs and the economy, but in order to
accomplish that objective, it is absolutely essential that we
do so in a bipartisan way because the decisions that will have
to be made are very tough decisions, and we will have to deal
on a balanced way across the budget expenditures.
We have, essentially, four items. You have the interest on
our debt, which is not subject to negotiation. That must be
paid. We must have a credit worthiness throughout the world.
Secondly, we are going to have to deal with discretionary
spending, both on the defense side and on the non-defense side,
and of course, we reached a budget agreement last year which
did exactly that and set parameters of spending which will save
substantial billions of dollars going forward.
Lastly we have to deal with our entitlements. From my
perspective, we need to deal with our entitlements, maintaining
the guarantee of those entitlements, but also guaranteeing
their sustainability over the decades to come. I will continue
to work with Republicans and Democrats towards that objective
because I think it is one of the most critical that we have in
this country for the people we represent. I thank the gentleman
for his question.
Mr. Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hoyer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lankford. Mr. Hoyer, thank you for being here. Mr.
Loebsack, you are recognized.
Mr. Van Hollen. And if I could, and I have to leave, Mr.
Chairman, but I just want to thank our other colleagues who are
here, Mr. Critz, Mr. Loebsack, and Mr. Higgins. I also see Ms.
Jackson-Lee and I am going to turn it over to my friend and
colleague Mr. Honda. So I want to thank you Mr. Honda.
Mr. Lankford. Mr. Loebsack.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOEBSACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF IOWA
Mr. Loebsack. Thank you Mr. Lankford. I, in particular,
want to thank Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for
the opportunity to testify today about Iowans priorities for
the 2013 budget.
Last year, in my testimony, I urged Congress to come
together to address the great challenges facing our nation. As
I testified then, these challenges demand tough, common sense
choices, and serious bipartisan work. That has not changed.
Iowans want Washington to come together and make thoughtful
decisions that reduce the unsustainable deficit and prioritize
economic recovery. We missed a major opportunity, I think, last
year, and I share Iowans disappointment with Congress's
inability to work together and address the fiscal crisis facing
our nation. That has not gone away. I sincerely hope that
partisan differences can be put aside and that these priorities
will be reflected in the 2013 budget.
Last year, I strongly urged Congress to go big, as many of
my colleagues did on both sides of the aisle, and aim for $4
trillion in deficit reduction. I also made it clear that I am
willing to compromise and consider any serious balanced
proposal to reduce the deficit. That is why I have supported
two bipartisan balanced budget amendment proposals.
We all must be willing to make sacrifices to get our
country back on track, but that burden needs to be balanced. We
cannot, and should not, balance the budget on the backs of the
poor and the middle class. As an Iowan, I know agriculture is
willing to contribute through streamlining of farm support
programs, and cutting subsidies for storing certain
commodities. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I
fully support cutting at least two brigade combat teams from
Europe, and believe we need to take a hard-nosed look at the
number of troops we have deployed in Cold War legacy locations
around the world. Again, as a member of the Armed Services
Committee, that is why I am addressing those particular issues.
There are many other areas we could look at for savings, I
believe, including adopting a proposal I have pushed for years
to cut members of Congress pay for the first time since the
Great Depression and raising the retirement age at which
members of Congress are allowed to receive their pensions.
Iowans are right to be outraged when their tax payer dollars
are misspent. American tax payers should not be paying for the
same service three times, for example.
We also need to sell federal property that the government
has no need to spend money on, including power generating
assets like the Tennessee Valley Authority which could save
tens of billions of dollars. There are also too many
inefficient tax loopholes and special interest giveaways that
we need to get rid of. The tax code needs to be streamlined and
it needs to be simplified.
I was raised in poverty by a single mom and my grandmother,
and I share Iowans very real concerns, not just about what the
future holds, but about what the day to day holds for middle
class families who just cannot catch a break in this economy,
and for those families who have fallen out of the middle class.
I think we must promote an economy that works for all
Americans, and we must promote and strengthen safety nets like
Social Security and Medicare, so that many Iowans who rely on
those two programs will in fact have security in their
retirement, and succeeding generations as well.
Far too many middle class families are wondering how they
are going to afford to send their kids to college. Our nation
cannot retreat from our commitments to college access and
affordability by reducing Pell grants and other critical
student aid assistance. We simply cannot reduce that
assistance. I hear time and again from employers in Iowa that
the workforce looking for jobs often does not have the skills
needed to do the work for the jobs that are open. I urge the
committee to support workforce training, to provide American
workers with the ongoing training and skills they need to
secure good paying jobs, and for employers to be able to find
the workforce they need to grow. That training extends to the
specific needs facing our veterans as well. No man or woman who
has served our country in uniform should have to fight for a
job or their benefits here at home, especially when they were
willing to fight for our country prior to coming back to
America. I urge support for job training, transition
assistance, and benefit programs for those who have served our
nation so proudly.
Our country is facing an economic downturn that I think we
all can agree has gone on for far too long, and a long-term
deficit, I think we all can agree, that is threatening our
country's economic future. We must lay political differences
aside, or as I like to say, we have to political arms down, and
we have to seize what is an opportunity, I believe, to make
meaningful reductions to the deficit, to grow the economy, and
to support middle class families. We can do all of this at the
same time. I urge you to consider these proposals and I thank
you again for having me today and allowing me to testify and I
appreciate it very much, thanks.
[The prepared statement of David Loebsack follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dave Loebsack, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Iowa
Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for the
opportunity to testify about Iowans' priorities for the 2013 budget.
Last year in my testimony, I urged Congress to come together to
address the great challenges facing our nation. As I testified then,
these challenges demand tough, commonsense choices and serious,
bipartisan work. That has not changed.
Iowans want Washington to come together and make thoughtful
decisions that reduce the unsustainable deficit and prioritize economic
recovery. We missed a major opportunity last year, and I share Iowans'
disappointment with Congress' inability to work together and address
the fiscal crisis facing our nation. I sincerely hope that partisan
differences can be put aside and that these priorities will be
reflected in the 2013 budget.
Last year, I strongly urged Congress to ``go big'' and aim for $4
trillion in deficit reduction. I also made it clear that I am willing
to compromise and consider any serious, balanced proposal to reduce the
deficit. That is why I have supported two bipartisan balanced budget
amendment proposals.
We all must be willing to make sacrifices to get our country back
on track, but that burden needs to be balanced. We cannot and should
not balance the budget on the backs of the poor and middle class.
As an Iowan, I know agriculture is willing to contribute through
streamlining of farm support programs and cutting subsidies for storing
certain commodities.
As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I fully support
cutting at least two Brigade Combat Teams from Europe and believe we
need to take a hard-nosed look at the number of troops we have deployed
in Cold War-legacy locations around the world.
There are many other areas we could look at for savings, including
adopting a proposal I've pushed for years to cut Members of Congress'
pay for the first time since the Great Depression and raising the
retirement age at which Members of Congress receive their pensions.
Iowans are right to be outraged when their taxpayer dollars are
misspent. American taxpayers shouldn't be paying for the same service
three times. We also need to sell federal property that the government
has no need to spend money on, including power generating assets like
the Tennessee Valley Authority which could save tens of billions.
There are also too many inefficient tax loopholes and special
interest giveaways that we need to get rid of. The tax code should be
streamlined and simplified.
I was raised in poverty by my single mom and my grandmother, and I
share Iowans' very real concerns not just about what the future holds,
but about what the day to day holds for middle-class families who just
can't catch a break in this economy.
We must promote an economy that works for all Americans, and we
must protect and strengthen safety nets like Social Security and
Medicare that so many Iowans rely on for security in retirement.
Far too many middle-class families are wondering how they're going
to afford to send their kids to college. Our nation cannot retreat from
our commitments to college access and affordability by reducing Pell
Grants and other critical student aid assistance.
I hear time and again from employers in Iowa that the workforce
looking for jobs often doesn't have the skills needed to do the work
for the jobs that are open. I urge the Committee to support workforce
training to provide American workers with the ongoing training and
skills they need to secure good-paying jobs and for employers to be
able to find the workforce they need to grow.
That training extends to the specific needs facing our veterans. No
man or woman who has served our country in uniform should have to fight
for a job or their benefits here at home. I urge support for job
training, transition assistance, and benefits programs for those who
have served our nation.
Our country is facing an economic downturn that has gone on for far
too long and a long-term deficit that is threatening our country's
economic future. We must lay political differences aside and seize this
opportunity to make meaningful reductions to the deficit, grow the
economy, and support middle-class families.
I urge you to consider these priorities. Thank you again for
allowing me to testify today.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Loebsack. Mr. Higgins, you are
recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN HIGGINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Mr. Higgins. Thank you very much Mr. Lankford and Mr.
Honda, and also to Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen.
I am here to urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to
double the nation's commitment to cancer research. Funding for
the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of
Health are fundamentally important to tackling this disease
that kills so many of our fellow Americans. The importance of
cancer research is understanding that it has to be funded and
sustained over the longer term. It does not work when you stop
and start. The only failure in cancer research is when you
quit, or you are forced to quit because of lack of funding.
There were three ways, historically, to deal with cancer.
You could burn it out through radiation, you could cut it out
through surgery, or you could kill it through toxic chemicals.
We know, because of our nation's commitment to cancer research,
that there are promising new therapies called smart drugs that
attack the cancer cells without hurting the healthy cells. We
read recently of the use of vaccines, not only as prevention
for cancer, but also as therapies. They boost the body's immune
system to help the body better fight, naturally, cancers that
exist within the body, but by not sustaining cancer research we
are losing good research, but we are also losing good
researchers who are leaving the field. Ten years ago, 20 to 25
percent of cancer promising new research was funded. Today, it
is about 8 percent. This nation has to understand the
importance of sustained cancer research.
I represent the first comprehensive cancer center in the
entire nation, Roswell Park Cancer Institute. Buffalo, in
western New York, gave the nation and the world cancer
research. It started at the predecessor of Roswell Park Cancer
Institute called the New York State Cancer Laboratory. Treating
cancer early not only saves lives, but also saves the nation
funding, so it is very important that this Congress recognize
in a bipartisan way its moral responsibility to fully fund
cancer research so that we can more effectively treat those who
are afflicted and help heal, spiritually, those who love the
afflicted.
One thing, I just want to make note of as I conclude, and
that is that less than 10 percent of cancer deaths are
attributed to the original tumor. It is when cancer advances,
when it moves, when it metastasizes to a vital organ is when it
becomes lethal. Because of research, we have seen very
promising drugs, smart drugs: Herceptin for breast cancer,
Gleevec for gastrointestinal stromal tumors and chronic
myelogenous leukemia, that have been highly effective in saving
lives and saving this nation money. I implore you to include in
a budget resolution a doubling of cancer research because these
budgets, they do not only fund important programs, they are
value statements. They say something about our nation and what
we are committed to, and I respectively ask you to consider
this testimony and that of others who are urging a doubling of
cancer and biomedical research in this federal budget. With
that, I yield back, thank you.
[The prepared statement of Brian Higgins follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Brian Higgins, a Representative in Congress
From the State of New York
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, members of the Committee,
thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today on
the importance of a continued, sustained investment in cancer research.
I call on you today to craft a budget resolution that projects a
doubling of funding for cancer and biomedical research over the next
five years. The only failure in cancer research is when you quit or are
forced to quit because of lack of funding. If this Congress fails to
realize the potential of promising research taking place right now, we
will see losses in lives and jobs.
For cancer research to be effective it has to be sustained over
term. It can't stop and start because that's how you lose promising
research and promising researchers. President Nixon recognized this 40
years ago when he signed the National Cancer Act into law. Without the
federal commitment established by that Act, we would not be seeing the
progress that is being made today.
And there is significant progress. Smart drugs--highly targeted
treatments that attack fast growing cancer cells without damaging
healthy cells--are improving life quality for thousands of cancer
patients. Cancer vaccines--immunotherapies that prevent cells from
mutating to become cancerous--will eventually make it possible for
cancer patients of all types to proactively prevent their cancer from
spreading. Just last month, researchers at Roswell Park Cancer
Institute in my district announced a pathway for delivering vaccines to
cells that will be commercially practicable.
And Roswell Park, as one of the National Cancer Institute's 40 most
prestigious comprehensive cancer centers in the country, would not be
able to carry out its significant research mission without the federal
government's support.
But the federal government's commitment is not keeping pace with
the needs of the scientific community nor the demands of the
constituents we serve. Now, only one in six research applications are
getting funded, thwarting potential promising research. These
scientists are not sitting on their hands--they are packing up and
moving overseas. By not providing a strategic framework for research
funding, we run the risk of losing our global advantage in biomedical
research.
So now is the time to redouble our efforts and recommit ourselves
to this most worthy cause at a time when our constituents need us to
show leadership most.
I urge you to join me in this effort.
Thank you
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Higgins. Mr. Critz.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK CRITZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Critz. Thank you Mr. Chairman, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Honda,
and I also want to thank Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van
Hollen, and other distinguished members of the committee; thank
you for the opportunity to testify here today.
As we continue the discussion on the proper fiscal course
for our country, it behooves us to remember that despite our
ideological differences, we are all in agreement that solving
our budgetary challenges in a way that stimulates job creation
and economic growth should be our number one priority. If we
use this common ground as a starting point, the fiscal year
2013 budget can put Americans back to work and promote
nationwide prosperity. If, however, in the coming months we
choose to play politics with the well-being of the most
vulnerable among us, the results will be disastrous for
everyone. Too often we hear of proposals to drastically slash
Social Security, Medicare, and veteran's benefits. These
proposals are presented to us under the guise of fiscal
austerity, but they are clearly part of a partisan agenda. The
benefits stemming from any deficit reduction they might
generate pale in comparison to the disastrous implications they
carry for our seniors, our veterans, and working families
across America. These individual have played a central role in
building and maintaining America's greatness. To cut off the
lifelines our government has put in place to support them is to
display callousness, not courage, and to prioritize politics
over fiscal and economic progress.
A number of the programs that help seniors to live happy
and healthy lives and to keep them from slipping into poverty
came under an unprecedented assault during last year's budget
season. This committee presented members with a plan which
would have had a number of devastating implications for
Medicare recipients and the solvency of the Medicare program
for future generations. That plan proposed to replace Medicare
as we know it with an underfunded defined contribution system
which would have encouraged discrimination, promoted rationing,
and doubled or possibly even tripled out-of-pocket expense
costs for beneficiaries. It could have also led to more
widespread fraud and abuse by turning over billions of dollars
to the insurance industry without any mechanism for enforcing
accountability, and these negative consequences are just the
tip of the iceberg.
The plan would have also made deep cuts to Social Security.
Studies suggest that if it had been approved, the plan would
have cut benefits for 70 percent of recipients through price
indexing, the benefit formula, and cut benefits for all
recipients by accelerating the eligibility age increase and
eventually indexing the full retirement age to life expectancy.
Mr. Chairman, if we are going to make Social Security and
Medicare reform part of our plan to reduce the deficit, our
focus should be on rooting out fraud and abuse, not on cutting
benefits. If we are going to ask everyday hard-working
Americans to sacrifice, then we must also ask millionaires and
billionaires to sacrifice as well.
Last year, adherence to a flawed budget policy called in
the demolition crew when what we really needed was a sober and
steady hand of a surgeon. Instead of using a scalpel to
methodically cut the waste, these individual took a
sledgehammer to the programs our seniors rely on most heavily
for support, but the policy was not just flawed for what it
proposed to do to seniors, it also would have had devastating
consequences for those who have served our country in uniform.
Over 1.3 million veterans would have lost eligibility for VA
health care, and according to the Congressional Budget Office,
this would have left 130,000 veterans with no health care
alternative.
A poll taken last year by Military Advantage asked
respondents if veterans should be required to sacrifice their
benefits in the interest of reducing the deficit. An
overwhelming 88 percent said no, but despite the vast majority
of Americans being strongly against balancing the budget on the
backs of those who have served our country in uniform, there
are still those who are willing to put the programs these
individuals rely on for health and security on the chopping
block.
Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is this: We cannot follow a
budget formula that leaves seniors and veterans to fend for
themselves. We must condemn slash and burn measures in favor a
framework that makes responsible reforms while still preserving
the integrity of Medicare, Social Security, and health benefits
for those who worn the uniform of a grateful nation. The
president's fiscal year 2013 budget does just that. It
generates $360 billion in savings over 10 years through a
variety of changes to Medicare and other mandatory health
programs; the majority of these deficit reducing changes,
however, come from alterations to provider payment policies and
do not affect beneficiaries in any way. It also expresses a
clear commitment to keeping Social Security viable and solvent
for future generations, and proposes increased funding and
support for VA medical care and programs addressing veterans
unemployment and veterans homelessness.
In putting together the fiscal year 2013 proposal, the
president embraced a fact that has stood the test of time that
shared sacrifice breeds shared prosperity. Let us work together
to get our fiscal house in order in a responsible way that puts
our economy back on the path to prosperity. Mr. Chairman, I
thank you and the committee once more for your time. In
preparing for the fiscal year 2013 budget I urge you to put
politics aside and protect our promise to seniors, veterans,
and working families. I stand ready to help any way I can.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mark Critz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mark S. Critz, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Pennsylvania
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, other distinguished
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here
today.
As we continue the discussion on the proper fiscal course for our
country, it behooves us to remember that despite our ideological
differences, we are all in agreement that solving our budgetary
challenges in a way that stimulates job creation and economic growth
should be our number one priority.
If we use this common ground as a starting point, the fiscal year
2013 budget can put Americans back to work and promote nationwide
prosperity. If, however, in the coming months, we choose to play
politics with the wellbeing of the most vulnerable among us, the
results will be disastrous for everyone.
Too often, we hear of proposals to drastically slash Social
Security, Medicare and veterans' benefits. These proposals are
presented to us under the guise of fiscal austerity, but they are
clearly part of a partisan agenda. The benefits stemming from any
deficit reduction they might generate pale in comparison to the
disastrous implications they carry for our seniors, our veterans and
working-families across America.
These individuals have played a central role in building and
maintaining America's greatness. To cut off the lifelines our
government has put in place to support them is to display callousness,
not courage, and to prioritize politics over fiscal and economic
progress.
A number of the programs that help seniors to live happy and
healthy lives, and to keep them from slipping into poverty, came under
an unprecedented assault during last year's budget season. This
Committee presented Members with a plan which would have had a number
of devastating implications for current Medicare recipients and the
solvency of the Medicare program for future generations.
That plan proposed to replace Medicare as we know it with an
underfunded, defined contribution system which would have encouraged
insidious discrimination, promoted rationing and doubled--or possibly
even tripled--out of pocket costs for beneficiaries. It could have also
led to more widespread fraud and abuse by turning over billions of
dollars to the insurance industry without any mechanism for enforcing
accountability--and these negative consequences are just the tip of the
iceberg.
The plan would have also made deep cuts to Social Security. Studies
suggest that if it had been approved, the plan would have cut benefits
for 70 percent of recipients through price indexing the benefit formula
and cut benefits for all recipients by accelerating the eligibility age
increase and eventually indexing the full retirement age to life
expectancy.
Mr. Chairman, if we are going to make Social Security and Medicare
reform part of our plan to reduce the deficit, our focus should be on
rooting out fraud and abuse, not on cutting benefits. If we are going
to ask every day, hard-working Americans to sacrifice, then we must
also ask millionaires and billionaires to sacrifice as well.
Last year, adherents to a flawed budget policy called in the
demolition crew when what we really needed was the sober and steady
hand of a surgeon; instead of using a scalpel to methodically cut the
waste, these individuals took a sledgehammer to the programs our
seniors rely on most heavily for support.
But the policy was not just flawed for what it proposed to do to
seniors. It also would have had devastating consequences for those who
have served our country in uniform.
Over 1.3 million Veterans would have lost eligibility for VA
healthcare, and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, this
would have left 130,000 veterans with no healthcare alternative.
A poll taken last year by Military Advantage asked respondents if
veterans should be required to sacrifice their benefits in the interest
of reducing the deficit. An overwhelming 88 percent said no. But
despite the vast majority of Americans being strongly against balancing
the budget on the backs of those who have served our country in
uniform, there are still those who are willing to put the programs
these individuals rely on for health and security on the chopping
block.
Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is this: we cannot follow a budget
formula that leaves seniors and veterans to fend for themselves. We
must eschew slash and burn measures in favor of a framework that makes
responsible reforms while still preserving the integrity of Medicare,
Social Security and health benefits for those who have worn the uniform
of a grateful nation.
The President's Fiscal Year 2013 budget does just that. It
generates $360 billion in savings over ten years through a variety of
changes to Medicare and other mandatory health programs. The majority
of these deficit-reducing changes, however, come from alterations to
provider payment policies and do not affect beneficiaries in any way.
It also expresses a clear commitment to keeping Social Security viable
and solvent for future generations and proposes increased funding and
support for VA medical care and programs addressing veterans'
unemployment and veterans' homelessness.
In putting together the fiscal year 2013 proposal, the President
embraced a fact that has stood the test of time: that shared sacrifice
breeds shared prosperity. Let us work together to get our fiscal house
in order in a responsible way that puts our economy back on the path to
prosperity.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you and the Committee once more for your
time. In preparing for the fiscal year 2013 budget, I urge you to put
politics aside and protect our promise to seniors, veterans and working
families. Thank you.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Critz.
Mr. Honda. I want to thank you, too, for a very impassioned
presentation.
Mr. Lankford. Ms. Jackson Lee.
STATEMENT OF HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much to the chairman
certainly thank you to Mr. Honda, and thank you to the
chairperson in absence, Mr. Ryan, and the ranking member in
absence, Mr. Van Hollen, for your multiple leadership and
patience with members. I am going to try and speak as fast as I
can and emphasize, really, a listing of what I hope will be
considered by the budget committee.
First of all, I need to say that we can all do better with
respect to jobs in America because someone is either listening,
or will be reading the transcript, or following the budget
committee and will note for a fact that they do not have a job,
but at the same time I think we can acknowledge very quickly
that we have had some 23 months of economic growth. We have
seen corporate profits grow, we have seen jobs develop more in
this country, and so we know that the efforts that this
administration made, and President Obama, have been an
effective approach. The work that has been done by members of
the Budget Committee led by Ranking Member Van Hollen has also
been enormously effective.
I am the ranking member and former chair of the
Transportation Security Committee, and might I just bring to
the committee's attention that a report came out that said
2,287 attacks are carried out with the intent of harming public
surface transportation. So I ask the Budget Committee to
consider that 65 percent of homeland security or terrorist
attacks were against buses, bus stations, and bus stops, and
therefore I would ask that we consider, seriously, the
budgeting process on transportation security.
Just recently, we noticed a, if you will, intrusion on
airport or aviation permit security, meaning airports that were
subject to vulnerabilities, and I would ask that there be a
consideration of the amount of money that is necessary for
that. The budget of the president had $196.434 million and I
would ask that we are in keeping with that, or certainly not
lowering that any more. To protect the homeland has been a
victory for all of us, and we should continue to do so.
I ask for continued support for the Violence Against
Women's Act and note that we have had a number of staff lay-
offs, over 2,000 in that program and that program has saved
lives. I asked for continued support of the COPS program, the
Second Chance program, noting that many rural and urban
communities rely upon the enhancement or the added ability of
using extra cops on the beat, if you will.
In the Defense and Foreign and Veterans Affairs I would
indicate that Haiti is a work in progress, and continues to
need the support in foreign affairs, but support of this budget
committee as well as to ensure that with the many conflicts
around the world, that we provide the State Department with the
funding they need that they have been able to accomplish in
conflict resolution.
When we look at health care, I think it is Medicare,
Medicare, Medicare. I had asked this committee to consider to
not in any way sever the Medicare guarantee. That will
undermine every senior in this nation. We recognize that we
must look at spending, but I can fully say that the Affordable
Care Act has provided us a very strong mark on reduction of
health care, and I would indicate that we have been able to
provide to 20 million Americans good health care. So I would
ask that we continue to support elements such as community
health centers that have been able to open more patient rooms
and provide more care in more areas than probably any other
aspect.
People still die of AIDS, and I would ask a continuation of
support for treatment of AIDS, and particularly in the African-
American community; we are disproportionately affected by HIV/
AIDS and I would ask for that support.
Sickle cell disease is a most common inherited disorder
among African-Americans. It is an area that we have not focused
on, Mr. Chairman, and I would ask that the funding of sickle
cell, which is diminished, be reviewed, and I will be offering
a particular letter of support, regarding sickle cell anemia
that has lost funding.
In family planning, while I know that that is a conflicted,
if you will, issue, but let me just say, family planning deals
with saving lives. Family planning deals with women's access to
health care, and I would argue that we need to ensure a non-
partisan to women's access to health care.
I want to bring your attention and support the idea of full
funding for cancer research, but cancer cure. I happen to
represent aspects of MD Anderson, the premier cancer and
research hospital in the world. They are now looking at
biotechnology with presenting a cure for cancer. I would ask
for full funding for that, and full funding for preventing teen
pregnancy.
I do believe we have to find the route to deficit
reduction, and if I might, Mr. Chairman, just quickly say that
I support tax reform and the reduction of tax rates. I have
introduced deficit reduction job creation energy security bill,
and would offer to say to you that we have to, in a combined
way, do that. I support the funding of the HUD program,
multifamily program, and the full funding of veterans' needs.
Finally, let me just say that I would also indicate that
the southwest and regions in the country suffered enormous
impact of the drought. We have lost, if you will, ranching
capacity. We have lost millions of trees, the funding of the
U.S. Department of Agriculture and Interior on issues of
remediation with respect to drought, the impact of drought to
provide the funding necessary to bring those regions back along
with full disaster relief funding, I believe, would be
enormously important.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask that you be able to put my entire
statement in the record and I have an additional listing that I
would ultimately like to be able to submit if I am allowed
within the five day period to submit that list of items that I
am particularly interested in, and I thank the chairperson and
the committee, and the ranking member for their graciousness
and courtesies to members.
[The prepared statement of Sheila Jackson Lee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Texas
Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for allowing
me to testify before the Budget Committee. I come before you to
highlight a myriad of issues that are important to this Nation. It is
imperative to note that before I begin discussing FY 2013 budget, we
must take a moment to acknowledge that FY 2012 appropriations law was
delivered only after fierce debate regarding the serious cuts posed to
critical programs, including those within the Department of Homeland
Security.
Nonetheless, I stand here today and declare that the federal budget
is a moral document, with meaning, fiber, and a unique texture. I could
wax on and on today about the baseline as an extrapolation of future
budget conditions, based on the assumption that current policies will
continue in effect, et. cetera, et. cetera.
But the budget we craft, and what we do here today in the hallowed
halls of Congress is really about the American people and the impact
that our budget and fiscal policy decisions will have on them. The
elephant in the room is entitlement policy. Unlike discretionary
spending, mandatory spending grew rapidly from 5% of GDP in 1962 to a
range of 9% to 10.5% of GDP from 1975 to 2007, peaking in recession
years because of automatic stabilizers.
It exceeded 13% of GDP from 2009 to 2011, marking its highest share
of GDP since data were first compiled in 1962. In contrast to
discretionary spending, mandatory spending is projected to continue to
grow faster than inflation and exceed 13% of GDP over the next 10 years
under current policy. We must confront this head-on. The Affordable
Care Act was a monumental step in the right direction.
I am here to say that any type of entitlement reform will not be
done on the backs of little old ladies in the 18th District of Texas.
Step back and recognize: prior generations faithfully paid into the
current system and cannot be told that they were sold a bill of goods,
and that their benefits must not be ``reformed.''
That is an outrage!
And speaking of Texas, in the prior fiscal year, my hometown of
Houston, Texas was forced to lay off nearly one thousand municipal
employees. When these employees are put on the unemployment line,
libraries close, schools cut back on essential after-school programs,
community centers lose personnel, police hours are trimmed, and the
truly destitute become an after-thought.
Those tough budget decisions had a human cost and I here from my
constituents every day about them, and frankly, I don't want tax cuts
for the wealthy at the expense of jobs for people in Texas.
To provide you a brief roadmap, my written testimony touches on the
broad themes of (1)Transportation Security, (2)Justice and related
programs, (3)Defense and Veterans Affairs, (4)Healthcare, and
(5)Deficit and Taxation. Interwoven with those will be related but not
necessarily minor points concerning Energy Security, Education and
STEM, Housing and Homelessness, the allocation of Natural Resources,
Agriculture and Domestic Food Policy, and Diplomacy and Peace.
President Obama has noted repeatedly that the car was in the ditch
when he assumed the Presidency in winter of 2009. I am ready to rev up
that car and work with my colleagues in a bi-partisan fashion to not
only pull it out of the ditch, but also put it back on the road that
leads to economic productivity, sustained growth, deficit reduction,
and American prosperity.
transportation security
As the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Homeland Security
Subcommittee on Transportation Security, I have heard critical
testimony from Secretary Napolitano regarding the FY 2013 budget
request and the proposed funding levels for security programs,
particularly those aimed at enhancing the security of our
transportation sector.
The FY 2013 budget discussion surrounding homeland security matters
must take into account the FY 2012 appropriations law, which many of us
opposed, because it shortchanged homeland security in a number of
troubling ways.
With this backdrop and the prospect of an even less favorable
budget environment for FY 2013, I can understand the President's desire
to submit a Homeland Security budget proposal that comes in $1.3
billion less than last year's budget.
The President's FY 2013 budget request for the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) is $7.64 billion in total budget
authority, which represents a decrease of $196.434 million from the FY
2012, enacted level. The bulk of the TSA budget authority is dedicated
to aviation security operations, resulting in less than 2% of the
proposed funding being dedicated to surface transportation security.
Earlier this month, the Mineta Transportation Institute released a
report highlighting that 2,287 attacks were carried out with the intent
of harming public surface transportation between January 1, 1970 and
November 1, 2011. More than seven thousand people were killed as a
result of these attacks and more than 29,000 were injured.
Of these attacks, 65 percent were against buses, bus stations, and
bus stops. I strongly encourage the Budget Committee to give serious
consideration to these statistics and ensure surface and mass transit
security is not shortchanged.
On the aviation front, we continue to learn of breaches throughout
our aviation security programs that expose vulnerabilities at our
airports. One concern that deserves enhanced attention is how perimeter
security is addressed at our airports.
Just last week a driver accelerated through an unmanned gate and
drove onto airport property as a plane was taking off at Philadelphia
International Airport. We cannot leave TSA without the resources it
needs to address vulnerabilities relating to perimeter security. The
Transportation Security Administration must be allocated the resources
it needs to carry out its security mission.
I encourage the Committee to place a particular emphasis on the
mission critical areas of Perimeter Security and Training of all
Crewmembers Aboard Passenger Aircraft, and Surface and Mass
Transportation Security.
Also, we must restore grant funding aimed at enhancing transit
security in the National Preparedness Grant Program. As I have
expressed before, I have serious concerns about the funding level
sought for this consolidated grant program.
Mr. Chairman, our spending for Transportation Security must remain
a priority--the American people are counting on us.
justice and related programs
It is also imperative that Congress invest in programs that address
the needs of victims, such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and
the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA).
Not only do these programs save lives, but they also save money.
Studies show that domestic violence has declined significantly since
VAWA was first enacted in 1994, which is estimated to have saved
taxpayers at least $14.8 billion in net averted social costs in its
first six years.
The economic climate, however, has created a severe budget crisis
for programs that hold perpetrators accountable and provide safety for
victims across the country. In 2010, domestic violence programs laid
off or did not replace 2,000 staff positions including counselors,
advocates and children's advocates, and shelters around the country
closed.
According to a 2010 survey of rape crisis centers, 70% of programs
experienced a reduction in funding over the past year and 57% were
forced to reduce staff.
In addition, programs such as COPS, the Second Chance Act, and
programs that ensure that those in the immigration system are afforded
humane and professional treatment.
defense, foreign, and veterans affairs
The budget resolution that we agree to for FY 2013 should also
reemphasize the importance of the two ``Ds''--diplomacy and
development--which, along with defense, forms the core of our national
security and foreign policy.
I want to highlight some of the important issues facing our foreign
policy, and I hope that you, Mr. Chairman, will have an opportunity to
address them as we move forward in the budget process.
First and foremost, I would like to again address the issue of
Haiti. As you well know, American and her allies in 2010 initiated a
comprehensive, interagency response to the earthquake. This effort
spearheaded by the US Agency for State Department, was unprecedented
and extraordinary.
The State Department, the Department of Defense, Department of
Homeland Security, Coast Guard--all worked overnight to ensure critical
resources were positioned to support the response and recovery effort,
including efforts to find and assist American citizens in Haiti.
Our work in Haiti though, has only begun--we have a moral
obligation to work with our Caribbean neighbor--to help them to help
themselves to be put back on a course of national prosperity and its
rightful place at the table of nations.
On the global front, by working with nations to combat, disease,
violence, and terrorism, and encouraging environmental responsibility
and education, we can begin to take steps towards creating better
environments for less-advantaged nations, and particularly their
vulnerable women and children. Humanitarian assistance is also a first
step in reaching out to women and girls who are subject to the Shariah
law or other oppressive laws or regimes.
It results in not just monetary assistance, but also education and
training assistance that ensures effective and efficient programs.
Working not simply through USAID, but rather broadening our initiatives
internationally can ensure a cooperative and diverse aid system that
can save lives and foster international stability and cooperation.
I would also posit that it is essential that we allocate the money
spent on previous wars to programs like USAID which promote peace--the
war savings dividend must be re-invested in the ``Humanity Growth
Fund!''
healthcare
The over-arching point about health care is that even with the epic
passage of the Affordable Healthcare Act, health care spending is still
a large and rapidly growing part of the budget, mainly due to Medicare
expenditures and federal matching payments to states for Medicaid.
One of my top priorities is maintaining and increasing funding for
medical facilities in Texas. For example, with an international
reputation for excellence, the Ben Taub Hospital, Ginni and Richard
Mithoff Trauma Center is one of only two Level I trauma centers in
Harris County, Texas. Staffed by physicians from Baylor College of
Medicine, this Houston trauma center provides the highest level of
comprehensive care for patients with serious injuries or illness.
In addition, the M.D. Andersen is world-renowned for research in
cancer and other pernicious diseases. An amendment I offered last year
was intended to increase funding to study triple negative breast
cancer. The triple negative breast cancer strain is an aggressive type
of breast cancer with lower survival rates than other strains.
Between 13% and 25% of all breast cancer in the United States is of
the triple negative variety. Triple negative breast cancer accounts for
30% of all diagnoses among African American women. It is essential to
fund research that will develop a targeted treatment method for this
type of breast cancer.
Because I, along with many others, believe we must fully fund
efforts to eradicate cancer and other diseases, I hope you will lend
support to this issue to increase funding to study the dangerous triple
negative breast cancer strain.
According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, spending for these two
programs is projected to increase from 21 percent of non-interest
federal spending in 2010 to 31percent by 2020. The numbers are wonkish
sounding but in terms of real dollars, the increase is mammoth.
National spending on health care has grown about 2 percentage
points per year faster than GDP over time. Federal revenues, however,
have not kept pace, growing at roughly the same rate as GDP.
As a result, federal deficits will be driven upward by federal
health programs unless their rate of growth is tamed. This discrepancy
must be dealt with sooner rather than later, but no matter how you
couch it, there is no better translation than the word: b-r-o-k-e.
Having said that, I hasten to add that Community Health Centers
provide much needed, high-quality healthcare to over 20 million
Americans. These centers are able to serve vulnerable portions of the
American population, including racial and ethnic minorities, as well as
rural and low-income Americans.
These centers play an integral role in closing gaps in the
healthcare system, reducing broad disparities in access to quality
care. In recognition of the importance of community health centers,
funding has risen by $1.21 billion in the fiscal last year, creating a
platform to serve 300,000 new patients. Remember, that serving new
patients helps in promoting preventive medicine, which lowers costs
down the road.
Over half a million people have died of AIDS in America; this is
equal to the entire population of Las Vegas. Currently, there are 1.2
million people living with HIV in the U.S. One fifth of those affected
are unaware of their infection, increasing the risk of onward
transmission.
African Americans are disproportionately affected by the AIDS
epidemic. African Americans account for 40 percent of all recorded AIDS
related deaths in the U.S. Factors such as heightened levels of poverty
and lack of access to adequate healthcare shape the epidemic among
African Americans.
In the U.S. about 17,000 people died of AIDS in 2009 alone. This is
unacceptable. These statistics paint a dire picture of the status of
HIV/AIDS in the U.S. that must be addressed through augmenting programs
such as the Ryan White Programs and the Minority AIDS Initiative, which
serve to educate communities who are often outliers when it comes to
health education.
Sickle Cell disease is the most common inherited disorder among
African-Americans, with 1 in 375 live births affected. 1 in 12, or two
million African-Americans, are carriers of the disease. More than
100,000 Americans live with sickle cell disease.
Funding of Sickle Cell research will allow: (1) continued funding
of a stable number of regional networks and (2)the expansion and
upgrade of data collection efforts, capacity and analysis to more fully
achieve the evidence to evaluate the network activities and outcomes.
In addition, recent events have brought to light the true peril
that could await women's access to health care. That is why the $327.4
million for the Title X Family Planning Program is a key component of
our nation's health care infrastructure and a fundamental part of
building a women's health care delivery system that will meet the
growing demand for care under the Affordable Care Act.
In addition, increased funding for the Infertility Prevention
Program because family planning is not just about preventing unintended
pregnancy; it is also about planning for families. Screening and
treatment for STDs is an essential part of planning for a healthy
pregnancy.
I also must note that $130 million for the Teen Pregnancy
Prevention Initiative because young people need reliable, accurate
information to make responsible decisions and stay healthy, and there's
never been a more critical need.
According to the CDC, the teen birth rate has increased for the
second year in a row and for the first time in more than a decade, the
nation's teen pregnancy rate rose 3% in 2006. In addition, more than
three million girls have a sexually transmitted infection. Increased
investments to the tune of $130 million would grant sex education
access to 100,000 additional kids.
Increased funding for International Family Planning and
Reproductive Health Programs are increasingly important. This unmet
need for family planning is a missed opportunity to reduce the need for
abortions, the majority of which are unsafe.
Eliminating harmful policy riders that undermine women's access to
abortion care including access for women on Medicaid, women who work
for the federal government, Peace Corps volunteers, women in the
military, women in prisons, the DC abortion ban, and others.
Opponents of women's health care have abused the appropriations
process to undermine women's access to comprehensive reproductive care,
including abortion care. Through policy riders, opponents have limited
access for women on Medicaid, women who work for the federal
government, women who volunteer with the Peace Corps, women in the
military, women in prisons, and others.
veterans
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have brought renewed attention to
the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless veterans. Both
male and female veterans have been overrepresented in the homeless
population, and as the number of veterans increases due to these
conflicts, I am concerned that the number of homeless veterans could
rise commensurately. The recent economic downturn also has raised
concerns that homelessness could increase among all groups, including
veterans. As we witnessed in the Vietnam War and its aftermath, drastic
consequences can ensue if we don't take care of our veterans. Moreover,
attention must be paid to their mental health as well as their physical
and financial needs.
They have served our country and deserve to be treated as heroes
and heroines, worthy of honor.
housing
Homelessness in America has always existed, but it did not come to
the public's attention as a national issue until the 1970s and 1980s,
when the characteristics of the homeless population and their living
arrangements began to change. In Houston, homelessness is a significant
problem which are caused by a number of factors.
According to studies from the time, homeless persons are no longer
almost exclusively single men, but include women with children; their
median age was younger; they are more racially diverse, while in
previous decades the observed homeless population was largely white;
they were less likely to be employed and therefore had lower incomes;
they are mentally ill in higher proportions than previously; and
individuals who were abusing or had abused drugs began to become more
prevalent in the population. No matter, at the end of the day our
homeless persons are the responsibility of all of society.
A number of reasons have been offered for the growth in the number
of homeless persons and their increasing visibility. Many cities
demolished skid rows to make way for urban development, leaving some
residents without affordable housing options. Other possible factors
contributing to homelessness include the decreased availability of
affordable housing generally, the reduced need for seasonal unskilled
labor, the reduced likelihood that relatives will accommodate homeless
family members, the decreased value of public benefits, and changed
admissions standards at mental hospitals. The increased visibility of
homeless people is due, in part, to the criminalization of actions such
as public drunkenness, loitering, and vagrancy.
Our America is one that helps and cares for its most vulnerable.
energy security
The rapid growth and evolution of energy technologies and markets
offer both promise and challenges. By way of background, energy
development, production and consumption is driven by numerous laws
concerned with protecting consumers, encouraging domestic industry and
addressing conflicts over natural resources, pollution, and climate
change. Regulations, subsidies and taxes further impact adoption of new
technologies such as hydraulic fracturing, carbon sequestration,
biofuels and clean energy like solar, wind, hydrokinetic and
geothermal. Siting domestic and transborder transportation
infrastructure such as the Keystone XL Pipeline raises questions of
state and federal interests and authority. Finally, laws that govern
the physical and financial markets in energy and associated resources
shape not only demand and supply of energy but also impact the national
economy.
I have introduced H.R. 3710 which increases the acreage to 10
percent of what is already allocable under a proposal by Interior
Secretary Salazar, as announced on November 8th, 2011. In other words,
more land will be available for exploration, in line with two
objectives: decreasing our dependence on foreign sources for oil, and
plugging our budget deficit.
The monies will be deposited into the DRES Fund and invested by the
Secretary of the Treasury, until the money is transferred to the
Coastal and Ocean Sustainability Health Fund.(COSH) Annually, the
Secretary of the Interior is required to lease 20 percent of the DRES.
In addition, this bill will help foment job creation in an industry
that is already responsible for 9.2 million American jobs.
The bill also establishes the Deficit Reduction Energy Security
Fund, housed within the United States Treasury Department, which will
receive the accrued funds that are dedicated to deficit reduction. In
order to ensure that the putative funds generated from the leasing
activities which derive from this bill inure to the goal of deficit
reduction, the legislation also sets up the aforementioned COSH.
This bill establishes in the Department of the Treasury, the COSH,
which shall fund grants for addressing coastal and ocean disasters; and
programs and activities that restore, protect, maintain, manage, or
understand marine resources and their habitats, and ocean, and coastal
resources, including baseline scientific research, and other programs
in coordination with federal and state agencies. Monies will be
deposited into the COSH fund from interest accrued on OCS royalties,
rents, revenues, and fees that will remain, for the period of one year,
in the Fund before moving the entirety of the principle in the general
Treasury. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to make grants
for such purposes. I look forward to working with members of this
Committee and our colleagues to ensure passage of this legislation.
education and stem
More than 40 million adults have basic skills needs or limited
proficiency in English that interfere with their ability to participate
fully in work, family and community activities. Current funding reaches
only 2.8 million of these adults each year and thousands more are on
waiting lists.
More than 77 percent of community-based literacy programs currently
report waiting lists. Adult education and literacy programs play a key
role in the success of other federal programs, including job training
and welfare reform. They also help parents support their children's
education and ensure that businesses are able to meet their workforce
needs.
We must continue working to improve college affordability &
accessibility: The rising cost of a college education is squeezing
millions of students and families who rely on access to an affordable
education to compete in the competitive job market and to preserve
their quality of life. As the cost of college outstrips middle class
Americans' ability to pay, too many students are forced to take on high
loan debt burdens and work long hours that interfere with their
academic study. I'm determined to see that every Texan who wants to go
to school will be able to afford it.
I am proud to support efforts that bring much needed relief to our
students in a fiscally-responsible way. I am especially proud of
efforts that strengthen our nation's Minority-Serving Institutions,
particularly in the STEM areas, so that students can stay in school,
graduate and succeed in our global economy. We passed a bill in 2009
that does this by investing $2.55 billion dollars in our nation's
Minority-Serving Institutions over a ten year period. The estimate is
that this funding will reach at least 500 institutions of higher
learning. These investments will create a new generation of workers in
STEM fields--professionals that our country desperately needs to remain
competitive in the world.
agriculture and domestic food policy
Over the years, Congress has authorized and the federal government
has administered much-needed programs to provide food to the hungry and
to other vulnerable populations in this country. Broadly, the programs
contained in these laws are the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) as well as the ``child nutrition
programs.''
Child nutrition programs is a category used to describe the USDA-
FNS programs that help to provide food for children in school or
institutional settings. The National School Lunch and School Breakfast
programs provide a per-meal subsidy for each meal that is served for
free, for a reduced-price, or for a full-price, called a ``paid'' meal.
The Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and Summer Food
Service Program (SFSP) will, under certain circumstances, provide free
meals or snacks to all the children at a site, because it is the site
(not the child) that is subject to eligibility criteria. The Fresh
Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP), or snack program, is sometimes
referred to as a child nutrition program. Fortunately, it was included
in the 2008 farm bill.
deficit and taxation
The cloud looming over this Congress is an unintended ``triple-
witching hour'' of tax increases that will take effect at the beginning
of 2013.
The expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts, the end of the recently
extended Payroll Tax Cut, and increases in capital gains and dividends
taxation will shock the conscience and wallets of the American people.
That is why Congress needs to enact bi-partisan legislation that helps
lower the deficit but does not wreck havoc on the financial soul of the
middle class.
But again, tax reform that lowers the rate, reduces the deficit,
and does not pick winners and losers is not easy, but let's not forget,
if President Reagan and then-Speaker Tip O'Neill could do it in 1986,
anything is possible.
In the Budget, the Administration calls for individual tax reform
that: cuts the deficit by $1.5 trillion, including the expiration of
the high-income 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. As a matter of sound fiscal
policy, I am supportive of this effort. I recognize the putative
economic benefits that many attribute to the Bush Tax Cuts, but we must
ask ourselves are they affordable?
The President's budget also eliminates inefficient and unfair tax
breaks for millionaires while making all tax breaks at least as good
for the middle class as for the wealthy; and observes the Buffett Rule
that no household making more than $1 million a year pays less than 30
percent of their income in taxes.
The individual income tax is a hodgepodge of deductions,
exemptions, and credits that provide special benefits to selected
groups of taxpayers and favored forms of consumption and investment.
These tax preferences make the income tax unfair because they can
impose radically different burdens on two different taxpayers with the
same income. In essence, Congress has been picking winners and losers.
There is absolutely no justification for huge tax cuts. The
wealthiest tax brackets should not profit at the expense of programs
keeping struggling families from poverty.
Bear in mind, the Republican's 2012 budget cut $2 trillion dollars
more than President Obama's Debt Commission advised, and those cuts
come from vital social services and safety nets for low income
families, children and seniors.
Tax expenditures also reduce the economy's productivity because
decisions on earning, spending, and investment are driven by tax
considerations rather than the price signals that a well-balanced, and
fair free market economy produces. These expenditures, whether for
individuals or corporations, are really no different than the much
ballyhooed entitlement programs, but they have cute names and fancy
lobbyists.
Moreover, tax expenditures make the tax system excessively complex
for honest taxpayers who are trying to comply with the law while
seeking the benefits to which they are legally entitled.
The system is so complex that most taxpayers--even those with low
incomes--now use either a professional tax preparer or tax software. A
one-page form shouldn't require a tax preparer who earns a percentage
of the return, or a fee. It is not justifiable, especially when some
commentators like to point out that a number of taxpayers pay no tax--
well they somehow conveniently forget to mention that these ``tax
scofflaws'' making $30,000 dollars a year more than make up for it with
a long list of regressive taxes at the state and local level, for
starters.
The alternative minimum tax, or AMT, was initially designed to
ensure that all high-income taxpayers paid some income tax, has become
the poster child for the tax system's failure, requiring Congress to
enact increasingly expensive temporary patches to prevent the AMT from
encroaching on millions of middle class households particularly those
with children, in a web of pointless high tax rates, complexity, and
unfairness.
On the deficit reduction front it is important to remember the
economic crisis that the President inherited. I remember back in 2008
and 2009, when we experienced the worst recession since the Great
Depression. The economy actually contracted, it shrunk, at a rate of
almost 9 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008.
We lost 800,000 private-sector jobs in January of 2009 alone, and
unemployment was surging. Those are the conditions the President
inherited--the car was swerving into the ditch. He was not the driver,
but he was asked to come in on literally his first day of office, roll-
up his sleeves and figure out how to prevent the car from rolling
farther down the hill.
If you'll recall we also faced a housing market that was in crisis,
and we faced a financial market crisis as well that threatened to set
off a global financial collapse. We have a come a long way since then
yet there is more work to be done.
I would like to thank you once again for allowing me to appear
before you and I look forward to working with you as we fashion a
strong, fiscally sound budget for FY 2013 that maintains the moral
integrity that a budget for the United States of America must have, in
sustaining our Nation's priorities.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you, without objection you may submit
those things.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you. Mr. Ellison.
STATEMENT OF HON. KEITH ELLISON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
Mr. Ellison. Let me thank you, Mr. Chairman and I will also
thank the chairman of the committee, Budget Committee Chairman
Ryan, and Ranking Member Van Hollen. I do appreciate the
attention of the budget committee, I am the co chair of the
progressive caucus and we intend to submit a budget for review
for the Congress this year, which we will be calling the
people's budget, and in that particular budget we expect to be
demonstrating, and the budget will reflect our values, as all
budget reflect the values of their authors. The people's
budget, which we do intend to submit, is based on the values of
fiscal soundness, fairness, and shared contribution. Our budget
asks basic questions: Do we value tax cuts for the wealthy more
than rebuilding our basic infrastructure? Do we value subsidies
for oil companies more than we value Medicare and health care
for veterans? Working families face waning public investment, a
fraying safety net, and a tax system rigged to favor the
wealthy. Our budget must rebuild our economy so that it works
for everyone, not just a privileged few.
Let me turn, first, to defense spending. First we need a
sustainable Pentagon budget that reflects sound national
security strategy. Defense spending nearly doubled over the
last decade. With two wars drawing to a close, we need a
leaner, more agile force to combat 21st century threats. For
example, we should cancel the F-35 joint strike fighter
program, which has seen exorbitant cost overruns, but even as
we rejoice in having our distinguished men and women coming
home from Iraq and Afghanistan, our veterans services are
facing drastic cuts. Are we really willing to continue funding
outdated weaponry while cutting veteran training and employment
services? A responsible budget should reduce the baseline
military spending to focus on the needs of modern warfare and
redirect those funds to priorities such as caring for our
veterans.
Let me focus on the oil industry exemptions. America also
cannot afford to corporate welfare for the oil and gas
industry. Last year the big five oil companies made a combined
profit of $137 billion. We are not against companies and
corporations that try to turn a profit, but I hardly think that
they need the tax payer subsidy. Exxon Mobil, Chevron,
ConocoPhillips were ranked first, fourth, and 15th most
profitable companies, and yet these companies argue that they
cannot afford to lose their tax payer funded subsidies. Over
many decades of successful lobbying, these industries have
carved out a long list of loopholes to the tune of about $4
billion a year. It is time for these funds to go to middle
class families, small businesses, and to repairing our nation's
infrastructure.
Jobs are a top priority and value of our budget. Our
budget, our people's budget, must put Americans back to work
rebuilding our great country. America needs to rebuild roads
and bridges and dams and waterways. Right now, more than 69,000
bridges across the United States required significant
maintenance or replacement, yet last year's House budget
proposed a 36 percent cut to investment in our nation's
highways, leading to a loss of almost 500,000 jobs or half a
million jobs. This is far short of what we need to enhance
America's competitiveness and it takes us backward in creating
good jobs for hardworking families. Americans deserve better.
Now, let me turn to a fair and responsible tax system. It
is also time we replace a broken tax system that favors
corporate special interests with one that works for the
majority of Americans. Last year, the extreme gap between the
rich and the rest of us came into the national spotlight thanks
to the Occupy Wall Street movement, who said what Americans
have known for a long time, working and middle class Americans
have been working harder and harder for less and less. The
richest 400 earners for 2008 had an average income of $270
million, yet their average tax rate was only 18.2 percent. That
is the same as what working Americans who earn about $40,000 a
year are paying. That makes no sense.
We need fair tax rates for millionaires, such as opposed by
my colleague Representative Jan Schakowsky, that creates a new
income tax brackets starting at 45 percent for couples making
over $1 million a year. We also need to enact the Buffet rule
to ensure that secretaries are not paying higher tax rates than
their bosses. Millionaires are not job creators, they are
profit maximizers, and there is nothing wrong with that, but we
cannot confuse the two. If they can earn more profit by firing
someone, they will and they do, and if they can earn more
profit by hiring people, they will and they do, but they are
not job creators, they are profit maximizers. We need fair tax
system so we can improve our infrastructure, fortify education
system, and bolster our economy, and support real job creators
who are consumers and workers and innovators across our
economy.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus Budget will be
comprehensive, fiscally responsible, and embrace these values
of fairness and shared responsibility. I ask for your support
in the budget proposal. I also ask that you craft a budget that
works for all Americans, not just the well-connected and well
off. Make no mistake, every tax cut for a millionaire is an
education cut for America's children. Every tax giveaway to a
special interest gives away our ability to rebuild America. It
is time we started expanding opportunity and stopped shrinking
the middle class, I thank you.
[The prepared statement of Keith Ellison follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Keith Ellison, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Minnesota
Thank you Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen for allowing
me to testify today. The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget that
we will be presenting to this Committee reflects our values, as all
budgets reflect the values of their authors. The People's Budget is
based on the values of fiscal soundness, fairness, and shared
contribution. Our budget asks basic questions: do we value tax cuts for
the wealthy more than rebuilding our infrastructure? Do we value
subsidies for oil companies more than Medicare or health care for
veterans?
Working families face waning public investments, a fraying safety
net, and a tax system rigged to favor the wealthy. Our budget must
rebuild our economy so that it works for everyone, not just the
privileged few.
defense spending
First, we need a sustainable Pentagon budget that reflects sound
national security strategy. Defense spending nearly doubled over the
last decade. With two wars drawing to a close, we need a leaner, more
agile force to combat 21st century threats. For example, we should
cancel the F-35 joint strike fighter program, which has seen exorbitant
cost overruns. But even as we rejoice in having our distinguished men
and women coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, our veterans' services
are facing drastic cuts. Are we really willing to continue funding
outdated weaponry while cutting veteran training and employment
services? A responsible budget should reduce baseline military spending
to focus on the needs of modern warfare, and redirect these funds to
priorities such as caring for our veterans.
oil industry exemptions
America also can't afford corporate welfare for the oil and gas
industry. Last year, the big five oil companies made a combined profit
of $137 billion. ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips were ranked
the first, fourth, and 15th most profitable companies. And yet these
companies argue that they cannot afford to lose their taxpayer-funded
subsidies? Over many decades of successful lobbying, these industries
have carved out a long list of loopholes--to the tune of $4 billion a
year. It's time for these funds to go to middle class families, small
businesses, and to repairing our nation's infrastructure.
jobs
Our budget must put Americans back to work rebuilding our great
country. America needs to rebuild our roads and bridges, our dams and
waterways. Right now more than 69,000 bridges in the U.S. require
significant maintenance or replacement. Yet, last year's House budget
proposed a 36 percent cut to investment in our nation's highways,
leading to a loss of almost 500,000 jobs. This is far short of what we
need to enhance American competitiveness. And it takes us backward in
creating good jobs for hard working families. Americans deserve better.
a fair and responsible tax system
It's also time we replace a broken tax system that favors corporate
special interests with one that works for the majority of Americans.
Last year, the extreme gap between the rich and the rest of us came
into the national spotlight thanks in part to the Occupy Wall Street
movement, who said what Americans have known for a long time: working
and middle class Americans have been working harder and harder for less
and less. The richest 400 earners for 2008 had an average income of
$270 million, yet their average tax rate was only 18.2 percent; that's
the same as what working Americans who earn about $40,000 a year are
paying. This makes no sense. We need fair tax rates for millionaires,
such as a proposal by my colleague Representative Schakowsky that
creates new income tax brackets starting at 45 percent for couples
making over $1 million per year. We also need to enact the Buffett Rule
to ensure that secretaries aren't paying higher tax rates than their
bosses. Millionaires aren't job creators--they're profit maximizers. If
they can earn more profit by firing someone, they will. We need a fair
tax system so we can improve our infrastructure, fortify our education
system, and bolster our economy.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus budget will be comprehensive,
fiscally responsible, and embrace these values of fairness and shared
responsibility. I ask for your support of our budget proposal.
I also ask that you craft a budget that works for all Americans,
not just the well-connected and the well-off. Make no mistake: every
tax cut for a millionaire is an education cut for America's children;
every tax giveaway to a special interest gives away our ability to
rebuild America. It's time we started expanding opportunity and stopped
shrinking the middle class. Thank you.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Ellison. We will take a quick
transition here. So if the next panel wants to be able to come
on up, we will receive you in the order I think you came
through the door; and it would be Mr. Keating, Mr. Clarke, Mr.
Connolly. We will all take a quick stretch break as well. Mr.
Keating, are you ready?
Mr. Keating. Yes, I am.
Mr. Lankford. It will be an honor to receive your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM KEATING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS
Mr. Keating. Thank you Mr. Chairman. My constituents on the
South Shore region, Cape Cod, the islands, Nantucket, and
Martha's Vineyard all support various viewpoints as this budget
approaches. Many of those people feel that the divided
atmosphere in Congress, and the programs that are consequently
threatened by this division, cause greater concern. I am here
to communicate their views to the committee.
When I testified before the committee last year, I focused
on job creation. Since then, the economy has improved, and some
of my proposals like tax credits to hire veterans returning
from Iraq and Afghanistan have found consensus and have been
implemented, yet job creation and employment protections for
jobs going overseas still remain on the top of my list of
priorities. For this reason, I urge the Budget Committee to be
wary of short-sighted proposals that would eliminate job
creating initiatives and compromise our safety for the sake of
immediate savings.
Unfortunately, this year has been full of such examples,
particularly in the women's health care area, green and
alternative energy, and public safety programs, and homeland
security as well.
I will begin with what has become an unnecessary scapegoat,
women's health programs. The fact is that family planning
services not only save lives, but also save money through early
diagnosis and preventative care. This administration has been a
vocal advocate for women's health programs like Title X which
provides low-income women with access to prevention and family
planning services. However, funding for the Title X programs
has not kept pace with inflation since 1980 leaving the
disparity of nearly $400 million we have today. In
Massachusetts alone, health care facilities receiving Title X
funding served over 85,000 patients and provided nearly 30,000
cancer screenings, contraceptive service, immunizations, and
sexual transmitted disease infection testing and treatment.
Additionally, teen pregnancy prevention and education have been
a source of reduction as well.
An open dialogue with reproductive health services is
necessary, and most effective in terms of dealing with the
issues of youth pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease, and
though international funding has been a source of controversy,
there is one area where we need to keep specific attention.
Through international family planning programs the world's most
disadvantaged women are provided access to the reproductive
health care necessary to evade preventable child and maternal
deaths, also to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS and address
social instabilities that lead to the depletion of resources
and consequent global conflict. Our peace-keeping abroad,
therefore, includes the empowerment of women and girls and I
implore the Budget Committee to protect these vital services.
We must not forget that this budget is not simply a
document of line items and dollar amounts. The true faces of
those impacted by funding decisions are the constituents we
return to each week. Just today, it was reported that the Otis
Air Force National Guard Base may lose 170 much needed jobs
because of an Air Force budget that is not doing enough to
protect personnel. That is why funding for these programs that
provide our communities with basics needs is also invaluable.
To that end I urge you to maintain the funding level enacted in
fiscal year 2011 for LIHEAP. With assistance provided through
LIHEAP low-income families and seniors are sheltered from
bitter New England winters and kept cool in the boiling
summers.
Another example is Community Development Block Grant
Program, a federally-funded competitive grant program designed
to help small cities and towns meet their community development
needs. In Massachusetts alone over 60,000 persons were assisted
in the past five years for every year of CDBG funding, an
average of another 1.6 million in private and public funding
was leveraged.
I would also like to take a moment to talk about something
that is at the heart of my public service career, and that is
combating substance abuse. It is a sad fact that 1.7 people on
average die a day in Massachusetts from opiate-based drug
overdoses, and the effects of addiction can be seen throughout
our entire country. Just recently I visited a 14-year-old girl
fighting addiction in Hyannis. The heartbreak of this scene was
compounded by the fact that she also had hepatitis C, a
condition she will have with her for the rest of her life.
As a former DA, I am a strong proponent of drug courts, and
the drug court discretionary grant program helps to develop
treatment drug courts that integrate substance abuse treatment,
mandatory drug testing, and transitional service of non-violent
substance abuse suspects. In 2011, the DAO confirmed that drug
courts reduce crime by up to 58 percent with cost savings
ranging from $4,000 to $12,000 per participant. An investment
in drug courts is in an investment made in jobs and lives
saves, and in investment in our financial future.
Finally, this Congress has witnessed incessant attacks on
the air that we breathe and the water that we drink. I am
prepared to fight these concerns on the House floor, but I need
your assistance to ensure these priorities are represented in
this year's budget. As a representative of a coastal district
that is also home of the Massachusetts fishing industry, I am
pleased to see that the president's request for NOAA includes
an increase of over $160 million in funding and I am encouraged
that NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service has also seen an
increase in funding, thereby improving the stock assessments
and translating this into a direct impact on fishermen and
related small business and industries.
On a smaller note, Cape Cod was borne witness to the
vitality of a small grant program that now faces extinction.
That is the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance
Grant Program. It is the sole source of funding of its kind,
and it has provided $4 million in funding to aid in the
response and study of distressed marine mammals. The past
winter over 170 dolphins were found stranded on the shores of
Cape Cod, and practically speaking, we have to, for those
surviving mammals, be able to execute removal.
And the chopping block also is cuts in preparedness and
grant programs that deal with pre-hazard mitigation grant
programs and have a long-lasting repercussion on our nation's
ability to prevent, mitigate, and respond to major disasters.
Unfortunately, as the ranking member in the Homeland Security
Subcommittee, I had to watch the budgets for preparedness get
slashed. These are just some of the areas that I would like to
highlight that specifically affect my area. I thank the
committee for their consideration.
[The prepared statement of William Keating follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. William R. Keating, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Massachusetts
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Van Hollen, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before the Budget Committee today. My
constituents on the South Shore, Cape Cod and Islands of Nantucket and
Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts have strong opinions about how their
taxpayer money should be spent. Moreover, they are concerned about the
increasingly divided atmosphere in Congress and the programs that are
consequently threatened by this division. I am here to communicate
their views.
When I testified before the committee last year, I focused on
effective and prompt job creation. Since then, the economy has improved
and some of my proposals--like tax credits to hire veterans returning
from Iraq and Afghanistan--have been implemented. Yet, job creation and
further employment protections still remain on the top of my list of
priorities. For this reason, I urge the Budget Committee to be weary of
short-sighted proposals that would eliminate job-creating programs and
compromise our safety for the sake of immediate savings.
Unfortunately, this year has been full of such examples spanning a
broad range of business sectors, including women's health care, green
and alternate energy, public safety programs and homeland security
cuts, as well.
I will begin with what has become an unnecessary scapegoat: women's
health programs. The fact that we must fight to provide family planning
services and education to women and girls in this country is a stain on
this great nation's reputation. This Administration has been a vocal
advocate for women's health programs, like Title X, which provides low-
income women with access to preventative and family planning services,
and vital sex-education programs.
However, funding for Title X programs has not kept place with
inflation since 1980--leaving a disparity of nearly $400 million today.
In Massachusetts alone, health care facilities receiving Title X
funding served over 85,000 patients and provided nearly 30,000 cancer
screenings, gynecological examinations, contraceptive services,
immunizations, and sexually transmitted infection testing and
treatments.
Additionally, teen-pregnancy prevention and education programs have
seen a reduction in funding--despite a continued $50 million for failed
``abstinence only'' programs. Uncensored education and open dialogue
about reproductive health is the proven, most-effective form of youth
pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention.
We must ensure that we encourage the same values abroad as we do at
home. The international family planning community has requested $1
billion in funding for the United Nations Population Fund and the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID). Through these programs,
the world's poorest and most disadvantaged women are provided access to
the reproductive-healthcare and family-planning services necessary to
combat unintended pregnancies--thereby reducing the need for risky
abortions, evading preventable child and maternal deaths, halting the
spread of HIV/AIDS, and addressing the social instabilities that
continue to plague developing and underdeveloped nations. Our diplomacy
abroad begins and ends with the empowerment of these women and girls,
and I implore the Budget Committee to protect these vital services.
We must not forget that this budget is not simply a document of
line items and dollar amounts. The true faces of those impacted by
funding decisions are the constituents we return to each week. That is
why funding for programs that provide our communities with basic
necessities is so invaluable.
To that end, I urge you to maintain the funding level enacted in
Fiscal Year 2011 for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program,
known as LIHEAP. With the assistance provided through LIHEAP, low-
income families and, most importantly, seniors are sheltered from the
bitter New England winters and kept cool in boiling summers. It is our
responsibility to protect these families from deciding between paying
their energy bills and feeding their families.
Another example is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
program, a federally funded, competitive grant program designed to help
small cities and towns meet a broad range of community development
needs. In Massachusetts alone, over 60,000 persons were assisted in the
past five years. These funds were spent on valuable economic
development activities, public facility improvements, public services
for seniors and children, and housing assistance and construction,
among others. For every year of CDBG funding an average of another $1.6
million in private and public funding was leveraged.
I would also like to take a moment to talk about something that is
at the heart of my public service career, the Drug Court Discretionary
Grant (DCDG) program, a federal program that provides financial and
technical assistance to states, state courts, local courts, units of
local government, and Indian tribal governments is absolutely
essential. This program help to develop and implement treatment drug
courts that effectively integrate substance abuse treatment, mandatory
drug testing, sanctions and incentives, and transitional services in a
judicially supervised court setting with jurisdiction over nonviolent,
substance-abusing offenders. Programs funded by DCDG are required by
law to target nonviolent offenders. If we truly want to lower the
exorbitant criminal justice costs associated with substance abuse
related crime, we must look to a readymade solution in Drug Courts. In
2011, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) confirmed that
Drug Courts reduce crime by up to 58%. With cost savings ranging from
$4,000 to $12,000 per participant, an investment in drug Courts is an
investment in jobs, lives saved and our financial future.
Finally, this Congress has witnessed the most profane and incessant
attacks on environmental protections in decades. It seems that even the
most common-sense and necessary priorities are not safe--including
sufficient funding for research and data collection initiatives that
ensure the design and implementation of sound, accurate policies. I am
prepared to fight for these concerns on the House floor, but I need
your assistance to ensure these priorities are represented in this
year's budget.
As representative of a coastal district that is also home to
Massachusetts' fishing industry, I am pleased to see that the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has thus far survived the
chopping block and that the President's request includes an increase of
over $160 million in funding. I am encouraged that NOAA's National
Marine Fisheries Service has also seen an increase in funding--thereby
improving stock assessments that translate into a direct impact on
fishermen and related industries.
The work of NOAA's weather and climate satellite programs are
invaluable to furthering our country's ability to combat the
consequences of climate change, such as improving the accuracy of
regional sea level rise predictions. Accelerated implementation of the
National Ocean Policy will encourage the development of offshore
renewable energy capabilities and allow our nation to take its place as
a leader in renewable energy markets.
However, Cape Cod has born witness to the vitality of a small grant
program that now faces extinction. The John H. Prescott Marine Mammal
Rescue Assistance Grant Program is the sole federal funding source of
its kind, and has provided national marine mammal stranding networks up
to $4 million in funding to aid in the response to and study of
distressed and stranded marine mammals. This past winter, over one
hundred dolphins were found stranded on the shores of Cape Cod.
Undeniably, each would have perished had it not been for the resources
provided to local volunteers and stranding networks through the
Prescott Grant Program.
Also on the chopping block is disaster funding. Cuts in funding for
state and local preparedness grant programs, specifically to the Pre-
hazard Mitigation Grants Program, will have long-lasting repercussions
on our nation's ability to prevent, mitigate, and respond to terrorist
attacks and major disasters. Preparedness is the first step in ensuring
the safety of our communities, particularly in urban areas.
Unfortunately, as the Ranking Member of a Homeland Security
Subcommittee, I have had to watch the budget for these preparedness
grants be slashed and as the Administration proposes to eliminate the
Pre-hazard Mitigation Grants Program, I have renewed my commitment to
working through the committee to fight against these cuts and help
steer funding toward communities that need them the most.
The American people understand: this is the year of budget
constraints. My testimony not only reflects the priorities of the Tenth
Congressional District of Massachusetts, but echoes the messages I have
heard from across the country. We must ensure that this budget
incorporates effective funding decisions that encourage efficiency but
do not overlook the many critical needs of Americans of all
backgrounds.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Keating. Would you like to
submit full statement for the record as well?
Mr. Keating. I will, thank you.
Mr. Lankford. That would be great. Thank you, sir. Mr.
Clarke.
STATEMENT OF HON. HANSEN CLARKE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
Mr. Clarke. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for having me here. I am
the proud representative of a region in this country that was
known, decades ago, as the arsenal of democracy. Metropolitan
Detroit saved this country; it saved this world from fascism.
We won the war for America and for democracy. Our innovation
created millions of jobs through the auto industry, and right
now we have the capacity, the capability, to create even more
jobs in our new advanced manufacturing economy. So I am asking
this Budget Committee to fund investments in the metropolitan
region surrounding the city of Detroit and the city of Detroit
as a way to create more jobs throughout this country. I have
several proposals that will do so. One would capture the
federal tax dollars that Detroiters pay to the federal
government by placing them in a federally protected government
trust fund. That cost would be around $2 billion a year for
five years. That money would be used to eliminate the city's
debt and then invest in job creation and infrastructure repair.
I also will soon propose the elimination of capital gains tax
on new investment made in distressed communities, such as
Detroit, Pontiac, and Flint in the state of Michigan. I would
have this pilot available in states throughout the country.
Detroit has fallen on hard times. The region has, but so
has many communities around this country, and in large part
because of the housing crisis which depressed property values
so low that many local units of government can no longer raise
the revenue that they need to help make their streets safer and
to improve our schools; yet, if Detroit is able to attract
investment that creates jobs, it will need safe streets and
good schools. Since this Congress in the past has not quickly
or effectively addressed the problems of the housing crisis, I
am asking Congress now to address the needs of our cities and
our local units of government to provide more funding for
police officers, firefighters, emergency medical providers, and
other first responders that we need to make sure our people are
safe.
In particular, we can look at increasing the funding for
certain grants out of the Department of Justice, and through
the Department of Homeland Security of which I am a member of
the committee that oversees that department.
The federal government also imposes mandates on school
districts that require school districts to educate every child
effectively like they should. The federal government just needs
to fund those mandates, so that every child in every school
district can get the best possible education. They should not
be short-changed because they may have special needs or because
they were homeless. We all deserve the best in this country and
the greatest equalizer is providing for a good education.
I would also ask that this committee consider fully funding
and restoring cuts to the Workforce Investment Act because
there are many jobs right now in this country that go unfilled
because we need people who are trained to be hired into them.
We have around 600,000 manufacturing-related jobs that we need
to hire people for, so by better funding for the workforce
development programs and by investing in Detroit, we can help
prepare people for the jobs that are already here that need to
be filled, which will create more jobs in this country.
One final note, I would also ask the committee to allocate
certain savings from our military operations, especially in
Afghanistan, a small percentage to help the cut the debt that
is really burdening American families, and that is stopping
young people from getting an education that they need, not only
to make a great living, but to create more jobs in this
country. I ask this committee to use part of that money to help
forgive certain student loans on millions of Americans who are
struggling with student loan debt.
That will give student loan borrowers a second chance, but
most relevantly, to our nation's economy, it will create jobs
because it will free up the purchasing power of student loan
borrowers, so they can now invest on their own, buy a home, and
start their own business, and that is how you create jobs in
American economy. That is how we have done it in the past, and
that is how we can do it now.
Thank you so much for giving me this opportunity to present
my budget recommendations to this committee. Again, I am
honored to represent the symbol of U.S. manufacturing and the
symbol of the comeback of the U.S. economy, metropolitan
Detroit. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Hansen Clarke follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Hansen Clarke, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Michigan
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify as the
Committee considers a Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2013. I
sincerely appreciate the chance to discuss the budget priorities of the
13th District of Michigan and Metro Detroit as a whole.
Despite a difficult fiscal reality, we must look to the future and
prioritize investment in strengthening our economy, our workforce, and
our communities in the long term. We cannot afford to make deep funding
cuts that emphasize the cost of a program over their true worth. Many
programs ensure access for our families and our neighbors to the high-
quality education, job training, nutrition, and health care that they
need and deserve. Only a targeted budget that preserves investment in
our nation's human capital will meet the present and future needs of
our country, and promote our common values of equal opportunity for
all.
As a nation, our first priority must be creating good jobs that
will allow Americans to support their families and preparing our
workforce to be successful in a new economy. We must lend some of our
focus to programs that support small businesses and strengthen local
economies, whether through technical assistance, tax incentives, or
start-up grants that allow entrepreneurs to make the investments
necessary to start their own businesses.
We must also target resources towards providing Americans with the
training to hold the jobs available. That is why funding for programs
under the Workforce Investment Act, or WIA, is crucial. WIA programs
provide opportunities for young workers, dislocated workers, and
chronically unemployed workers, among others, to get the education and
training they need to be successful in today's job market. The
Government Accountability Office estimates that 90% of the fastest-
growing employment opportunities will require some post-secondary
education, and WIA programs are well placed to provide this education.
Given the changes in our economy and the need for training programs to
respond accordingly, WIA reauthorization must be a priority for
Congress. The economic recovery of our families, our communities, and
our nation depends on it.
The devastating toll of our economic recession has trapped many
neighborhoods in a cycle of poverty. Eroding tax bases, persistent
blight and high numbers of foreclosures threaten to isolate certain
communities from taking part in our rebounding economy. Programs such
as the Community Development Block Grant can play a critical role in
breaking this cycle by investing in infrastructure improvements.
Through these investments, communities become more active and livable,
accelerating economic growth and expanding the opportunity for economic
prosperity.
Turning our attention to the regional economy, one of the most
important economic resources for Detroit and the Midwest region has
been accessibility of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes are a key
strategic asset for our agriculture, manufacturing and recreational
economies. I look forward to working with the Committee to ensure a
strong budget for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Preserving
this precious resource for future generations must remain a priority.
Creating strong local economies is crucial, but only equal access
to quality education will enable America to compete in a global
marketplace. That is why I am advocating for sufficient funding to be
dedicated to programs that reduce disparities and help schools meet the
needs of students in difficult circumstances. I support educational
programs such Promise Neighborhoods, the Title I, Part A College- and
Career-Ready Students program of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act, Special Education Grants to States, and the Homeless Children and
Youth Education program.
As a Member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, I
continue to urge the Committee to put a high priority on science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, education programs.
Investing in these programs allows our country to sow the seeds of
innovation and American competitiveness. As technology shrinks our
world, it becomes more evident that strengthening our education
programs will play a pivotal role in maintaining our global economic
leadership.
No less important than access to elementary and secondary education
is access to post-secondary education. We cannot afford to sacrifice
the innovation and energy of our young people to poverty and lost
educational opportunity. Pell grants provide so many low-income
students with the funding necessary to make a college education
possible; we must increase funding for these grants. We must also
provide relief for the thousands of college graduates saddled with huge
amounts of debt. Young people in America should be able to pursue
higher education to achieve their dreams without worrying that this
decision will devastate their financial futures. We must take action to
responsibly forgive certain student loans and to provide every student
loan borrower with basic consumer protections.
As a Member of the Homeland Security Committee, it is important to
me that we retain our focus on strengthening border protection and
providing resources for urban, high risk areas. I urge this committee
to support full funding for the National Preparedness Grant Program. It
is critical that our cities, states and counties have the ability to
keep our families and communities safe. In particular, I am hopeful
that we can find a way to shield the Urban Areas Security Initiative
from further cuts. Despite our financial situation, we must remain
steadfast in our commitment to protect our neighbors, family and
friends.
Mr. Chairman, I know that our Congressional priorities are many and
yet our budget situation demands fiscal restraint. I am hopeful that we
can push aside our partisan differences and continue investing in
America's growth. I look forward to working together to reduce our
deficit while promoting those priorities that make America strong.
Thank you.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you Mr. Clarke. Mr. Connolly, my friend
who I get to sit next to in hearings all the time.
STATEMENT OF HON. GERALD CONNOLLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
Mr. Connolly. Thank you Mr. Chairman, it is great to be
with you again. Let me welcome our newest colleague, Ms.
Bonamici of Oregon. Glad to have you here in the Budget
Committee. I had the privilege of serving on the Budget
Committee in my first term, and it is a great platform in which
to gain a handle on federal issues. So thank you Mr. Chairman
and thank you for your warm welcome.
I have a full statement I would ask be entered fully into
the record.
Mr. Lankford. Without objection.
[The prepared statement of Gerald Connolly follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Virginia
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for this opportunity to
express the concerns of my constituents for the Fiscal Year 2013
budget.
As a former local government official, and a former member of this
Committee, I know firsthand the competing interests in preparing a
budget. In each of my 14 years on the Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors, we adopted a balanced budget. We struck a balanced
approach to maintain investments in education, transportation, public
safety, affordable housing, and environmental stewardship.
Last year's House Republican Budget Resolution made no such attempt
at striking that balance. I agree cuts need to be made. Spending at 24
percent of GDP was too high. But cuts alone will not solve our problem.
You cannot ignore the other side of the ledger. Revenues at 14 percent
of GDP are too low by historical standards. Yet the FY 2012 Budget
Resolution proscribed only draconian cuts. Since non-defense
discretionary spending represents just 15 percent of the total federal
budget, the Republican Budget Resolution resorted to an evisceration of
Medicare as well.
Completely ignoring the historically low revenues is irresponsible
and perpetuates imbalance. A responsible business would look at all
aspects of its ledger, from reducing costs to increasing revenues, and
the federal government must do so as well.
This Congress took a momentous step in reducing expenditures with
the passage of the Budget Control Act, cutting federal deficits by $2.1
trillion over the next decade. Although these significant reductions,
by themselves, will not fully restore long-term fiscal responsibility,
they represent actual cuts, and highlight the need to also focus on
revenue.
The President's proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget offers a
sustainable and responsible framework. It brings down deficits,
reaching primary balance by FY 2017 through a mixture of spending cuts
and revenue enhancements in the ratio of 2.5 dollars in cuts for every
1 dollar in new revenue. The President's budget also recognizes the
importance of maintaining important investments that contribute to
America's long-term economic success.
We cannot hope to compete globally if we disinvest in education.
Offering quality education provides the building blocks for a skilled
workforce, product innovation, and economic growth. The academic
performance of American students continues to lag other industrialized
nations, and further cuts to education will be a detriment to our
economic future.
Similarly, the federal government realizes a significant return on
its ``investments in savings.'' Let me give you just a few examples.
Last year, the State Department Inspector General said every dollar
invested in its operation yields $14 in agency savings. Arbitrary cuts
to this and other federal agencies imperil our ability to identify and
realize not only cost savings, but also revenue. Every dollar invested
in IRS enforcement returns $5 in revenue, and I would remind my
colleagues that the misguided proposal to slash IRS funding in H.R. 1
actually would have resulted in a 7 to 1 annual loss in revenue. How is
that savings?
Perhaps the federal investment with the greatest rate of return is
the Government Accountability Office. Every dollar invested in the GAO
results in $91 in identified savings though actions like reducing
improper payments and coordinating federal data center consolidations.
That simple action alone is projected to save several billion dollars
once implemented. In fact, I have introduced legislation to do just
that, yet the Oversight Committee and House Republican leadership
continue to be more concerned with advancing an ideological agenda than
improving the nuts and bolts operations of the federal government.
We also must work to ensure that the federal workforce of the
future is well-equipped to continue providing essential services. Over
the last 50 years, the ratio of federal employees to citizens has
fallen from 13 per 1,000 to 8 per 1,000 Americans. Continuing to attack
civil servant pay and benefits will sour potential workers on public
service and lead to increased inefficiency. Federal workers already
have contributed more than $60 billion to deficit reduction through two
separate pay freezes. Additionally, House Republican leadership
recently used an increase in out-of-pocket expenses for federal
retirement benefits as a pay-for in H.R. 3630. The House Republican
transportation bill also targeted federal retirement benefits while
grossly disinvesting in transportation. Any budget resolution that
continues to single out federal employees for further sacrifices
without asking others to share in that sacrifice lacks any semblance of
balance or fairness.
Transportation investments also are vital to American success.
Workers spend an increasing amount of time stuck in gridlock, reducing
productivity and harming employee morale. We must repair and expand our
nation's roadways, bridges, and transit systems. Sadly, the House
Republican transportation bill reduces investment for 45 states and
eliminates investment in transit.
This year's Budget Resolution must provide meaningful
transportation investment and preserve the federal commitment to the
Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority. My Republican predecessor,
Tom Davis, sponsored legislation to invest $150 million a year for 10
years with matching dollars from the District of Columbia, Virginia and
Maryland. The Washington Metro system is America's subway, serving the
millions of annual visitors to our nation's capital. More than 40
percent of rush-hour riders are federal employees, and half of all
stations are located on federal property. This is a vital partnership
that must be maintained.
I look forward to supporting a Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year
2013 that delivers greater fiscal responsibility by balancing spending
cuts with the adequate revenue to maintain the critical investments our
nation has made and must continue to make to be the leading global
economy. Thank you again for this opportunity.
Mr. Connolly. I am not going to read to you. I am going to
make just three points, if I may. There are lots of points that
could be made, but three. One is as a budget is constructed, I
urge the committee to take a balanced approach. We are at 24
percent of GDP as a percentage in terms of federal spending;
that is too high, it needs to come down. We are only at 14
percent or so of GDP in terms of federal revenue; that is too
low. The last time we balanced the budget we were more like 19
to 20 percent, and we balanced budget four years in the row
with a Democratic president and a Republican Congress. If they
could do it, we can do it.
And so I urge the committee to look at both. No private
business in this country only looks at spending cuts to get to
its bottom line, it looks at the prices it charges its clients
and its customers, it looks at the revenue side of the ledger.
We need to too, and so I would hope that we have a balanced
approach to the budget this year and that we eschew ideological
rigidity in this regard for the sake of the country.
The second point I would like to make, Mr. Chairman, is
that not all spending is the same, and I urge this committee to
differentiate among spending items. Investments and savings,
for example, have returns on them. Our committee found that,
for example, the State Department IG's office, Inspector
General's Office, every dollar we invest there yields $14 in
agency savings. In the IRS, not everybody loves it, but for
every dollar you invest in IRS and new agents, we get $5 back
in recovered revenue. That is a worthwhile investment when we
are looking at the debts we are looking at.
Mr. Chairman, just on our own committee the other day, we
had the head of the Government Accountability Office testify
before our committee, the Oversight And Government Reform
Committee, that an astounding rate of return. For every dollar
invested in GAO, they recovered $91 in waste, fraud, and abuse.
That is a worthwhile investment, and yet this Congress has
actually slashed funding for GAO, such that it is now at the
lowest level since 1935. That is not prudent policy; this is an
investment worth making. The upfront costs will guarantee huge
returns, and I think that is a smart thing to do.
My third and final point I want to share with this
committee is let us return to a sense of respect for our
federal employees. We have asked our federal employees to give
much, and asked almost nobody else to sacrifice anything. We
have frozen their wages for two years and we are looking at a
third, contributing over 10 years $60 billion to federal debt
reduction. In the payroll tax extension bill we passed a few
weeks ago to fund the unemployment insurance extension, we took
$15 billion out of federal pension programs for prospective
employees, and in the pending transportation bill, the proposal
is still not revised, we take another $40 billion out of
federal pensions for federal employees, including the existing
and current workforce. I do not think that is fair, and I think
the disparagement of the federal workforce does nobody honor.
These are public servants who serve our constituents, they
deserve dignity and respect for what they do, and I hope that
is reflected in our budget actions as well because ultimately,
a budget is a statement about values.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you so much for having
this hearing, and for hearing from all of us today.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you, Mr. Connolly. Mr. Posey.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL POSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Posey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Budget Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to come before
you today to respectfully urge you to preserve NASA's core
mission, human space flight. Our investments in NASA's human
space flight program are a matter of national security. It is
not, as some suggest, an endeavor that we can no longer afford.
I would strongly argue that it is an endeavor that we can ill
afford to ignore if we are to maintain our national security
and enhance our economic security. Space, clearly, is the
world's military high ground; it is to the United States and
the free world what the Golan Heights is to Israel. To
understand this, we need only listen to the testimony two weeks
of one of our nation's leading intelligence officials. The
director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, General Burgess,
highlighted the risk posed by China through their investments
human space flight. Testifying before the Senate Armed Services
Committee, the general said of China, Their space program,
including ostensible civil projects, supports China's growing
ability to deny or degrade the space assets of potential
adversaries and enhance China's conventional military
capabilities. He went on to add, China has successfully tested
a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon,'' ASAT is the acronym
for it, ``and is developing jammers and directed energy weapons
for ASAT missions.''
``A prerequisite for ASAT attacks, China's ability to track
and identify satellites, is enhanced by the technologies from
China's manned space flight programs and lunar programs, as
well as technologies and methods developed to detect and track
space debris. Let me repeat that, China's military advances are
a direct result of China's manned and lunar programs.
By ceding our leadership to China and Russia, we would be
walking away from the ultimate military high ground. That is
the reality if we fail to adequately invest in our nation's
space program, including NASA's human space flight program. As
you proceed in developing a budget resolution, it is in our
national security interests that sufficient funding be provided
and that NASA be directed to prioritize human space flight
within the overall NASA budget. Russia and China are nipping at
our heels and threatening our position as the world leader in
space and human space flight, a position we have held since
1969. Today we are in the untenable position of having no,
zero, not a zilch, domestic means of putting a U.S. astronaut
into space, yet China and Russia both have that capability.
Direction and a full commitment from the administration have
been seriously lacking. As a result, our human space flight
program is suffering, and the U.S. is on the cusp of ceding its
leadership in space to our adversaries. This is not in our
national security best interest, nor is it in the best interest
of our economic security.
Mr. Chairman, as we have discussed in the past, our
investments in human space flight have helped us maintain our
competitive edge economically, our advantage on the
battlefield, and the endless commercial products that have
improved every aspect of our daily life and of our overall
economy. The reality is that our lives depend on space. If you
use a cell phone, a Blackberry, a credit card, cash bank
withdrawals, GPS, or you are one of the ones that grow the food
that we eat every day, or if for any reason you depend on
accurate weather report, you depend on space. The president
abandoned the Constellation program in his fiscal year 2011
budget. During a consideration of the fiscal year 2012 budget,
NASA delayed by nearly 12 months presenting a design plan for
moving forward with a space launch system. This lack of bold
leadership for the world's premier space exploration
organization puts America at risk.
In fiscal year 2010, NASA reached its high watermark budget
of $18.7 billion. In fiscal 2012, the NASA is $17.8 billion,
and for fiscal year 2013, the administration has proposed
further reducing NASA's budget to a level of $17.71 billion,
more than a billion dollars less than the fiscal year 2010
budget. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the committee review the NASA
budget, and that you work to ensure that NASA is provided with
not less than $17.7 billion. This is critical if the United
States is going to continue to secure the military high ground,
space. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Bill Posey follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Posey, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Florida
Chairman Ryan, Members of the Budget Committee, I appreciate the
opportunity to come before you today to respectfully urge you to
preserve NASA's core mission: human space flight.
Our investments in NASA's human space flight program are a matter
of national security. It is not as some suggest, an endeavor that we
can no longer afford. I would strongly argue that it is an endeavor
that we can ill-afford to ignore if we are to maintain our national
security and enhance our economic security.
Space is the world's military high ground. It is to the United
States and the free world, what the Golan Heights is to Israel. To
understand this we need only listen to the testimony two weeks ago of
one of our nation's leading intelligence officials.
The Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, General Burgess,
highlighted the risks posed by China through their investments in human
space flight. Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee he
said of China, ``[Their] space program, including ostensible civil
projects, supports China's growing ability to deny or degrade the space
assets of potential adversaries and enhance China's conventional
military capabilities.'' He went on to add, ``China's successfully
tested a direct ascent anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) missile and is
developing jammers and directed-energy weapons for ASAT missions. A
prerequisite for ASAT attacks, China's ability to track and identify
satellites is enhanced by technologies from China's manned and lunar
programs as well as technologies and methods developed to detect and
track space debris.'' Let me repeat that. China's military advances are
a direct result of ``China's manned and lunar program.''
By ceding our leadership to China and Russia and India to a lesser
extent, we would be walking away from the ultimate military high
ground. That is the reality if we fail to adequately invest in our
nation's space program, including NASA's human space flight program.
As you proceed in developing a budget resolution it is in our
national security interest that sufficient funding be provided and that
NASA be directed to prioritize human space flight within the overall
NASA budget.
Russia and China are nipping at our heels and threatening our
position as the world leader in space and human space flight--a
position we have held since 1969. Today, we are in the untenable
position of having no domestic means of putting a U.S. astronaut into
space--yet China and Russia both have that capability.
Direction and a full commitment from the Administration have been
seriously lacking. As a result, our human space flight program is
suffering and the U.S. is on the cusp of ceding its leadership in space
to our adversaries. This is not in our national security interest nor
is it in our economic security interests. Mr. Chairman, as we have
discussed before our investments in human space flight have helped us
maintain our competitive edge economically, our advantage on the
battlefield, and endless commercial products that have improved every
aspect of our daily life and overall economy. The reality is that our
lives depend on space. If you use a cell phone, Blackberry, credit
card, GPS, and you or the ones who grow the food you eat depend on an
accurate weather report--you rely on space.
The President abandoned the Constellation program in his FY 2011
budget. During consideration of the FY 2012 budget, NASA delayed by
nearly 12 months presenting a design plan for moving forward with Space
Launch System (SLS). This lack of bold leadership for the world's
premiere space exploration organization puts America at risk.
In Fiscal Year 2010 NASA reached its high water mark budget of
$18.7 billion. The FY 2012 NASA budget is $17.8 billion. And, for FY
2013 the Administration has proposed further reducing NASA's budget to
a level of $17.71 billion--more than a billion dollars less than the
FY10 budget.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that as the Committee reviews the NASA budget
that you will work to ensure that NASA is provided not less than $17.7
billion. This is critical if the United States is going continue to
secure the military high ground: Space.
There are NO other federal agencies funded to pursue human space
flight.
The President's FY 2013 Budget submission has misplaced priorities
for Space and National Defense again. It cuts $162 million from the
heavy lift program and it slashes the Defense budget by $487 billion by
2021. Yet, the Administration has dealt significantly lighter
reductions to superfluous projects like studying climate change and
greenhouse gas emissions. In FY 2010, 16 federal agencies and
departments were funded at over $8 billion to address climate change.
And they continue to receive substantial funding for these initiatives.
Again, although 16 federal agencies deal with climate change, only one
agency is tasked with the challenges of human space flight.
China and Russia continue to increase the sophistication of their
human space flight programs and are reaping the national security and
economic benefits of those investments.
We also must not lose sight of the major national asset that the
human space flight workforce is to our nation. Our human space flight
program attracts and inspires some of the world's greatest minds.
Our human space flight workforce is not a spigot that can be turned
off and then back on at a later date. It takes years, sometimes decades
to build the expertise these workers hold. Without a clear vision and a
robust investment in our human space flight program this community will
quickly atrophy as these engineers and their expertise will be lost to
other pursuits and possibly other countries.
The time to refocus NASA on its primary human space flight mission
is now. The Budget Committee has the authority to help focus NASA on
human space flight, rather than allow it to flounder as yet another
agency without a clear focus and absent a clear mission.
Thank you for your leadership, and for giving me the opportunity to
address the committee regarding human space flight--a matter of great
economic and national security importance.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you, Mr. Posey.
Mr. Posey. Thank you.
Mr. Lankford. Mr. Cicilline.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID CICILLINE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee for the opportunity to come before you to testify
about our budget priorities. As of this past January, the
unemployment rate in Rhode Island stood at an unacceptable high
10.9 percent. That means more than 61,000 men and women in my
state are without work. As all of you know so well, the federal
budget is not just a series of estimates, revenues, and
expenditures; the budget is a powerful indication of our
priorities as a nation. The work that we will undertake in the
coming months is a reflection of our ability to chart a course
to prosperity in our states and nation. Charting this course
requires bipartisan collaboration and focusing resources on
issues that will generate growth in employment. Strength in our
small businesses helps our job creators and equip more
Americans, from cradle to career, college and beyond, with the
education, skills, and training they need to compete.
I would like to take this opportunity to call your
attention to three priorities that I believe warrant serious
consideration in fiscal year 2013. First, support for education
is our best investment in the future, and represents perhaps
the most the powerful tool in alleviating poverty and equipping
Americans with the skills they need to compete.
Our country's education advantage, once the envy of the
industrialized world, continues to lag. This reality, if not
addressed, will leave our economy behind as our rivals speed
ahead. As one report from Georgetown University indicated, of
the nearly 47 million job openings estimated between 2008 and
2018, more than 29 million will require at least some post-
secondary education. Far too often when I visit companies like
Teknor Apex in Pawtucket, Rhode Island in my district, I have
their owners telling me that they jobs to fill and plans to
expand, but they face difficulties finding people with the
right skill set. This cannot continue.
The president's fiscal year 2013 budget reflects the
necessary focus on the cradle to college and career support
that my state and our country needs to contend with the global
competition. This includes maintaining critical funding for
Title I and IDEA programs, increasing the maximum Pell grant,
extending the current 3.4 percent interest rate on subsidized
student loans, and providing a robust investment in community
college to career fund, which will support partnerships between
community colleges and businesses in high growth industries to
educate, train, and place more Rhode Islanders and more
Americans in well-paying jobs.
Second, in addition to a pipeline of well-trained
employees, our nation's recovery depends on the strength and
vitality of our small businesses. In Rhode Island, small
businesses with fewer than 20 employees accounted for
approximately 90 percent of all private sector employers in
2010. Small businesses are critically important for job growth,
having accounted for between 65 to 90 percent of net new jobs
over the past 15 years.
The president's fiscal year 2013 budget proposes important
investments to advance and sustain our small businesses,
including through the Hollings Manufacturing Extension
Partnership, the International Trade Administration, long
guarantees from the Small Business Administration, and the
creation of advanced manufacturing technology consortia and
regional innovation strategies program. Together, these and
other programs will help our small businesses and manufacturers
acquire much-need capital, expand access to markets abroad for
their goods and services, and accelerate innovation, job
creation, and the expansion of high growth industry clusters.
Finally, as I have heard many times during my Main Street
small business tours and community suppers, a sustained
economic recovery requires a thriving middle class. These are
the men and women who consume the goods and services being
produced by businesses. They are the firefighters, our
teachers, our police officers, our building tradesmen and
women, they are our veterans returning from combat, they are
young people, adult learners, and older workers in need of
enhanced skills. They are people like Estella Londono from
north Providence, Rhode Island who, after being laid off from
work, relied on unemployment benefits to sustain her family
while she participated in job training, improving her skills
and enhancing her ability to find a new job. We must make
certain that the 2013 budget supports Americans like Estella,
and provides for a thriving middle class.
Now is the time to put men and women to work on vital
infrastructure projects, fixing our roads, bridges, schools,
and water systems, keep college affordable so graduates are not
saddled with a lifetime of debt, ensure our returning veterans
have access to health care and job training, keep our promise
to seniors by protecting Medicare and Social Security, and pull
struggling homeowners above water, and returning vitality to
our housing market.
These are the priorities I was sent to Congress to defend,
and they will require serious conversation about which
investments are working for America, and will help us create
jobs, innovate for the future, and remain competitive in the
global economy, and which will not.
I look forward to the work ahead as we work together in a
bipartisan way to chart a course to prosperity for our country,
and I thank the committee for the opportunity to speak today,
and thank you in advance for you thoughtful deliberations.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of David Cicilline follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. David N. Cicilline, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Rhode Island
Thank you Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and members of
the Budget Committee.
As of this past January, the unemployment rate in Rhode Island
stood at an unacceptably high 10.9 percent. That means more than 61,000
men and women in my state are without work. As all of you know so well,
the federal budget is not just a series of estimates, revenues, and
expenditures. The budget is a powerful indication of our priorities as
a nation. The work that we will undertake in the coming months is a
reflection of our ability to chart a course to prosperity in our states
and nation.
Charting this course requires bipartisan collaboration and focusing
resources on initiatives that will generate growth in employment,
strengthen our small business job creators, and equip more Americans--
from cradle to career, college, and beyond--with the education, skills,
and training they need to compete.
I would like to take this opportunity to call attention to three
priorities that I believe warrant serious consideration in Fiscal Year
2013.
First, support for education is our best investment in the future
and represents perhaps the single most powerful tool in alleviating
poverty and equipping Americans with the skills they need to compete in
the 21st century economy. Our country's education advantage, once the
marvel of the industrialized world, continues to lag. This reality, if
not addressed, will leave our economy behind as our rivals speed ahead.
As one report from Georgetown University indicated, of the nearly
47 million job openings estimated between 2008 and 2018, more than 29
million will require at least some postsecondary education. Far too
often when I visit companies like Teknor Apex in Pawtucket, Rhode
Island, I hear owners telling me they have jobs to fill, and plans to
expand, but they face difficulties finding people with the right skill
set. This cannot continue.
The President's FY 2013 budget reflects the necessary focus on the
cradle to college and career support my state, and our country, needs
to contend with our global competitors. This includes maintaining
critical funding for Title I and IDEA programs; increasing the maximum
Pell Grant; extending the current 3.4% interest rate on subsidized
student loans; and providing a robust investment in a Community College
to Career Fund, which will support partnerships between community
colleges and businesses in high growth industries to educate, train,
and place more Rhode Islanders and Americans in well-paying jobs.
Second, in addition to a pipeline of well-trained employees, our
nation's economic recovery depends on the strength and vitality of our
small businesses. In Rhode Island, small businesses with fewer than 20
employees accounted for approximately 90 percent of all private sector
employers in 2010. Small businesses are critically important for job
growth, having accounted for between 65 to 90 percent of net new jobs
over the past 15 years.
The President's FY 2013 budget proposes important investments to
advance and sustain our small businesses, including through the
Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership, the International Trade
Administration, loan guarantees from the Small Business Administration,
and the creation of an Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia and
Regional Innovation Strategies Program. Together, these and other vital
proposals will help our small businesses and manufacturers acquire
much-needed capital, expand access to markets abroad for their goods
and services, and accelerate innovation, job creation, and the
expansion of high-growth industry clusters.
Finally, as I have heard time and again during my Main Street Small
Business Tours and Community Suppers, a sustained economic recovery
requires a thriving middle class. These are the men and women who
consume the goods and services being produced by businesses. They are
our firefighters, teachers, police officers, and building trades men
and women. They are our veterans returning from combat. They are our
young people, adult-learners, and older workers in need of enhanced
skills to compete.
They are people like Estella Londono from North Providence, Rhode
Island, who, after being laid off from work relied on unemployment
benefits to sustain her family while she participated in job training--
improving her skills and enhancing her ability to find a job. We must
make certain the Fiscal Year 2013 budget supports Americans like
Estella and provides for a thriving middle class. Now is the time to
put men and women to work on vital infrastructure projects--fixing our
roads, bridges, schools and water systems; help keep college affordable
so graduates are not saddled with a lifetime of debt; ensure our
returning veterans have access to health care and job training; keep
our promise to seniors by protecting Medicare and Social Security; and
pull struggling homeowners above water, returning vitality to our
neighborhoods and housing market.
These are the priorities I was sent to Congress to defend, and they
will require a serious conversation about which investments are working
for America and will help us create jobs, innovate for the future, and
remain competitive in the global economy, and which will not.
I look forward to the months ahead as we work, in a bipartisan
fashion, to chart a course to prosperity. I thank the Committee for
their time today and their thoughtful deliberation.
Mr. Lankford. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline for your testimony.
Are there any questions from the committee? Seeing none, I
thank you for being here.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lankford. At this time, we will now take a brief recess
as we wait for additional members to come testify. This hearing
is now in recess subject to the call of the chair.
[Whereupon, at 2:11 p.m., the committee recessed, to
reconvene at 2:13 p.m., the same day.]
Mr. Stutzman. The Budget Committee meeting will come to
order, and we want to welcome the Honorable Janice Schakowsky
for her testimony, you are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. JANICE SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, I appreciate it Mr. Chairman,
Mr. Ranking Member, Mr. Blumenauer. Many people have said that
budgets are moral documents and the choices that a family, a
business, or a government makes when crafting a budget, says
everything about where their priorities lie. At a federal
government, we face substantial short and long-term deficit
challenges that we have to address while simultaneously
constructing a strong foundation for a bright economic future
for our country, but it pays to remember how we got here.
Deficits were not an accident or unexpected like an earthquake
or a tornado. These deficits were man-made and just a decade
ago we had a budget surplus, and the debt was rapidly
decreasing, but during the Bush years, though, surpluses
disappeared and huge debts accumulated due to two unfunded
wars, two unfunded tax cuts, that mainly benefited the wealthy,
and a blind eye to the recklessness of Wall Street, which cost
8 million Americans their jobs, and caused a great recession.
The choices we make as a Congress can either right these
past wrongs or double down on the current path with inequality
at levels we have not seen since 1928, the middle class
shrinking, and people feeling that the American dream is
slipping away. So I am concerned that the majority, in the name
of fiscal responsibility, will craft a budget resolution that
will take a hatchet to the vital investments that support
America's middle class and those who aspire to it, and go after
the vulnerable populations and do not help to build our
infrastructure, or make scientific or technological innovations
possible, but there is another way.
So the first challenge is to tackle our number one deficit,
and that is the jobs deficit, and creating jobs equals deficit
reduction. We have had 23 straight months of private sector job
growth; we have seen the economy improve, but we are not there
yet, that is for sure. To address the nearly 13 million
Americans who are still out of work, I have introduced the
emergency jobs to restore the American Dream Act, HR 2914, and
my cost-effective plan would put 2.2 million people to work for
two years in jobs that meet the critical needs of our
communities across the country.
President Obama's American Jobs Act, included in his budget
proposal, includes similar components that would put people to
work rebuilding schools and communities and create jobs for
teachers and firefighters, police officers, and young people.
So it seems to me that we ought to stop paying companies for
leaving the United States of America with tax advantages, and
give those same tax breaks to companies that make it in
America, and I have a bill called Patriot Corporations of
America that does just that.
We have to ask more from those who can afford to pay more,
whether it is implementing the Buffet rule, or creating higher
tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires, as I have
proposed in the Fairness in Taxation Act, asking the very
wealthy to pay their fair share, and generating substantial
revenues.
Third, we cannot shift the burden to those who have already
been sacrificing for years. Poverty and inequality are bad for
individuals, the economy, and our democracy. Half of all
seniors make $19,000 or less a year in income. We must protect
the earned benefits in Social Security and Medicare, not cut
them in order to maintain tax breaks for the richest of
Americans.
Finally, we need to invest in education, transportation
infrastructure, scientific advancement, medical research, new
energy technologies, and other efforts that will build the
economy and our workforce.
I believe that the push for across-the-board cuts is
misguided, such cuts may be easy, but they are not fair, not
everyone is starting the race at the same line, and some
investments are more important than others because they expand
opportunities and strengthen the economy. Just because is
something is classified as non-security spending does not make
it any less vital. I would argue that cuts to USDA food safety
have everything to do with security, for example, and the
biggest bang for the buck actually comes from support systems
for families that are struggling. Every dollar spent on
unemployment insurance results in $1.64 in growth to the
economy. Every dollar spent on food stamps results in $1.72 in
growth.
So we have the means and the opportunity to create jobs, we
build the middle class, invest in our economic future, all the
while bringing down the deficit. Our budget, our moral
document, just needs to reflect those values. I thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Janice Schakowsky follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Janice D. Schakowsky, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Illinois
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Many people have said that budgets are moral documents. The choices
that a family, a business, or a government make when crafting a budget
say everything about where their priorities lie.
As a federal government, we face substantial short- and long-term
deficit challenges that we have to address while simultaneously
constructing a strong foundation for a bright economic future for our
country.
But it pays to remember how we got here. These deficits were not an
accident, or unexpected, like an earthquake or tornado. These deficits
were man-made. Just a decade ago we had a budget surplus and the debt
was rapidly decreasing.
But during the Bush years, those surpluses disappeared and huge
debt accumulated due to two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts that
mainly benefited the wealthy, and a blind eye to the recklessness of
Wall Street, which cost 8 million Americans their jobs and caused a
Great Recession.
The choices we make as a Congress can either right these past
wrongs--or double-down on the current path, with inequality at levels
we haven't seen since 1928, the middle class shrinking, and people
feeling that the American Dream is slipping away.
I am concerned that the majority, in the name of fiscal
responsibility, will craft a budget resolution that will take a hatchet
to the vital investments that support the American middle class and
those who aspire to it, protect vulnerable populations, build our
infrastructure, and make scientific and technological innovations
possible.
There is another way.
The first challenge is to tackle our number one deficit and that is
the jobs deficit; creating jobs equals deficit reduction. We've had 23
straight months of private sector job growth, we've seen the economy
improve but we're not there yet.
To address the nearly 13 million Americans who are still out of
work, I have introduced the Emergency Jobs to Restore the American
Dream Act (H.R. 2914). My cost-effective plan would put 2.2 million
people to work for two years in jobs that meet the critical needs of
our communities across the country. President Obama's American Jobs
Act, included in his budget proposal, includes similar components that
would put people to work rebuilding schools and our communities and
create jobs for teachers, firefighters, police officers, and for young
people.
We should stop paying companies for leaving the United States of
America with tax advantages and give those same tax breaks to companies
that make in America. I have a bill called Patriots of America that
does just that.
Second, we must ask more from those who can afford to pay more.
Whether it is implementing ``the Buffett rule'' or creating higher tax
brackets for millionaires and billionaires, as I have proposed with the
Fairness in Taxation Act, asking the very wealthy to pay their fair
share can generate substantial revenues.
Third, we cannot shift the burden to those who have already been
sacrificing for years. Poverty and inequality are bad for individuals,
our economy, and our democracy. Half of all seniors have less than
$19,000 a year in income. We must protect the earned benefits in Social
Security and Medicare, and ensure programs like Medicaid stay strong--
not cut them in order to maintain tax breaks for the richest Americans.
Finally, we need to invest in education, transportation and
infrastructure, scientific advancement and medical research, new energy
technologies, and other investments that will build the economy and our
workforce.
The push for across-the-board cuts is misguided. Such cuts may be
easy but they are not fair--not everyone is starting the race at the
same line, and some investments are more important than others because
they expand opportunity and strengthen the economy. Just because
something is classified as ``non-security'' spending doesn't make it
any less vital. Cuts to USDA food safety inspections have everything to
do with security, for example.
The biggest ``bang for the buck'' actually comes from support
systems for families that are struggling--every dollar spent on
unemployment insurance results in $1.64 in growth to the economy; every
dollar spent on food stamps results in $1.72 in growth.
We have the means and opportunity to create jobs, rebuild the
middle class, and invest in our economic future, all while bringing
down the deficit. Our budget--our moral document--just needs to reflect
those values.
Thank you.
Mr. Stutzman. Thank you. Are there any questions from the
committee?
Mr. Blumenauer. I was curious if you could just elaborate
for a moment. You mentioned, as the first piece of legislation
that you have been working on providing direct employment, and
I am just curious if you could just talk for a
moment on what it does for young people, and how that would
work for youth?
Ms. Schakowsky. Yes. It would put young people to work
dealing with our natural infrastructure, putting them to work
in improving our museums and our parks and our open spaces.
This would help to train and prepare them for future private
sector jobs, and would provide them with some wherewithal in
order to move themselves forward.
Also, as with the president's bill, it would repair
schools. The great thing about school infrastructure building,
it does not rely on a construction season, and you can do that
all year long. That would put the many people unemployed in the
construction industry to work.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you very much.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you very much.
Mr. Stutzman. Thank you for coming to the budget committee
and testifying, and we appreciate your comments.
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you.
Mr. Stutzman. At this time we will recognize Mr. Palazzo
for his testimony before the Budget Committee. Mr. Palazzo, you
are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. STEVEN PALAZZO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
Mr. Palazzo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I come before you
today with a grave concerns regarding the state of our nation's
defense spending priorities. My biggest concern remains the
fact that the president's budget includes a reduction of more
than $5 billion from last year's request. These are more than
just dollar signs on a page; these are real reductions in the
readiness and capabilities of our nation's military, and out of
the discretionary budget authority allotted this year, more
than $25 billion goes to mandatory spending in the Department
of Energy programs that is outside of the Department of
Defense. Multiple witnesses have testified before the House
armed services committee to tell us what these cuts mean to our
military, is being forced to do more with less. I am here to
inform the men and women of this committee that this is a risk
to our national security, and it is one that I am not willing
to take. These cuts represent losses to overall manpower.
It is estimated that the Army plans to reduce their
strength by more than 10,000 troops per fiscal year, resulting
in reductions from 552,000 in this fiscal year to 490,000 by
the end of fiscal year 2017. The Marine Corps plans to reduce
their numbers by 5,000 Marines per year for a reduction from
202,000 to 182,000.
While the men and women of our armed forces are what truly
make our military great, manpower is not the only risk under
the president's proposed budget. This budget puts significant
limitations on our military hardware as well. For example, I
represent a district that produces the greatest warships the
world has ever seen. Amphibious assault ships and surface
combatants project our nation's power across the oceans every
day. The sailors who sail upon these ships are some of our
nation's most visible ambassadors and one of the greatest
deterrents that our military has at our disposal. In wartime,
they provide the sea lift and combatants necessary to support
our troops on the ground.
Unfortunately, the president's budget also cuts our
nation's shipbuilding budget severely. A reduction of $1.3
billion in shipbuilding means fewer ships, less maintenance on
our current fleet, and a smaller force in the long term. This
forces our nation to remain close to the 285-ship Navy that we
currently have, instead of ramping up to the 313-ship goal that
the Navy previously set in order to meet their mission
requirements. These are just a few of the examples of risk that
are contained within this budget.
It is vital that as America's representatives we meet the
requirements of our military, while budgeting the necessary
funds to keep our country safe. Our men and women in uniform
have volunteered to make great sacrifices for our nation. Their
families have endured hardships through multiple deployments
and uncertainty over the past 10 years.
Also, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, we swore an
oath to defend our country against all enemies both domestic
and foreign; I do not believe that this budget lives up to that
promise.
Mr. Chair, may I also please take a moment to speak about
our nation's critical need to invest in space exploration? I
understand the need to practice greater fiscal restraint at a
time when our government spends too much. We must spend wisely,
we must prioritize, but our priorities should include an
investment in space exploration. Talking about spending in
space is a misnomer in two ways.
First, it is not spending, but investing in jobs and
technology and inspiration, in education, and in the next
generation of engineers and scientists. The money is not just
spent in space, but here on Earth, and predominantly, here in
America, for now the global leader in aerospace. The United
States has built an enduring legacy in the realm of space
exploration, but we are on the precipice of ceding that
leadership unless we support NASA's efforts towards developing
the next generation vehicle to replace the now-retired space
shuttle. We continue to service the International Space
Station, which has been crewed since 2000, and to facilitate
commercial companies to resupplying the ISS and eventually
carry crews into low Earth orbit.
The president's budget for NASA is essentially flat, which
is alarming only in the sense that funding for other scientific
agencies has increased, such as at NSF and at NSIT, we saw an
increase of 14 percent. In the area of space exploration the
president has not only failed to provide adequate funding, he
has failed to articulate an achievable vision for our nation to
work toward and rally around. May we in Congress, through our
spending priorities, continue to advocate for space exploration
and all the benefits that come from being a nation that
explores. I would just like to thank this committee for
allowing me to be here today, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Steven Palazzo follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Steven M. Palazzo, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Mississippi
Mr. Chairman, I come before you today with grave concerns regarding
the state of our nation's defense spending priorities. My biggest
concern remains the fact that the president's budget includes a
reduction of more than $5 billion from last year's request. These are
more than just dollar signs on a page, these are real reductions in the
readiness and capabilities of our nation's military. And out of the
discretionary budget authority allotted this year, more than $25
billion goes to mandatory spending and Department of Energy programs
outside of the Department of Defense.
Multiple witnesses have testified before the House Armed Services
Committee to tell us that these cuts mean that our military is being
forced to do more with less. I am here to inform the men and women of
this committee that this is a risk to our national security that I am
not willing to take.
These cuts represent losses to overall manpower. It is estimated
that the Army plans to reduce their strength by more than 10,000 troops
per fiscal year, resulting in reductions from 552,100 in this fiscal
year to 490,000 by the end of Fiscal Year 2017. And the Marine Corps
plans to reduce their numbers by 5,000 Marines per year for a reduction
from 202,100 to 182,100.
While the men and women of our Armed Forces make our military
great, manpower is not the only risk under the President's proposed
budget. This budget puts significant limitations on our military
hardware as well. I represent a district that produces the greatest
warships the world has ever seen. Amphibious assault ships and surface
combatants project our nation's power across the oceans every day. The
sailors who sail upon these ships are some of our nation's most visible
ambassadors and one of the greatest deterrents that our military has at
our disposal. In wartime, they provide the sea lift and combatants
necessary to support our troops on the ground.
Unfortunately, the president's budget cuts our nation's
shipbuilding budget severely. A reduction of $1.3 billion in
shipbuilding means fewer ships, less maintenance on our current fleet,
and a smaller force in the long-term. This shipbuilding budget forces
our nation to remain close to the 285-ship navy that we currently have,
instead of ramping up to the 313-ship goal that the Navy has set in
order to meet their mission requirements.
These are just a few of the examples of risks that are contained
within this budget. It is vital that as America's representatives, we
meet the requirements of our military, while budgeting the necessary
funds to keep our country safe.
Our men and women in uniform have volunteered to make great
sacrifices for our nation. Their families have endured hardships
through multiple deployments and uncertainty over the past 10 years.
Ladies and gentlemen of the committee, we swore an oath to defend
our country against all enemies foreign and domestic. I do not believe
that this budget lives up to that promise.
Mr/Madame Chair, may I also please take a moment to speak about our
nation's critical need to invest in space exploration? I understand to
need to practice greater fiscal restraint at a time when our government
spends too much, but we must spend wisely.
Talking about spending in space is a misnomer in two ways. First,
it is not spending, but investing- in jobs, in technology, in
inspiration, in education, in the next generation of engineers and
scientists. And the money is not spent in space, but here on earth, and
predominantly here in America, the global leader in aerospace.
The United States has built an endearing legacy in the realm of
space exploration. But we are on the precipice of ceding that
leadership unless we support NASA's efforts toward developing the next
generation vehicle to replace the now retired space shuttle, to
continue to service the International Space Station which has been
crewed since 2000, and to facilitate commercial companies to
resupplying the ISS and eventually carry crews into low earth orbit.
The President's budget for NASA is essentially flat, which is
alarming only in the sense that funding for other scientific agencies
has increased, such as at NSF, and at NIST which saw an increase of
14%. In the area of space exploration, the President has not only
failed to provide adequate funding, he has failed to articulate an
achievable vision for our nation to work toward and rally around. May
we in Congress, through our spending priorities, continue to advocate
for space exploration and all the benefits that come from being a
nation that explores.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to share my views with the
Budget Committee.
Mr. Stutzman. Thank you Mr. Palazzo. I have just a couple
of questions. You serve on the Armed Services Committee. Could
you talk a little bit about what you know from the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan winding down, how that should affect the
budget. Should it affect the budget? What do you see and hear
in the Armed Services Committee?
Mr. Palazzo. Personally I think there will be some savings
from the winding down of actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, but
too often we take end of one war to mean that there will never
be another action of even, or greater, consequence later on,
and it thus results in a hollowing out of our nation's
military, not only our NCOs, our officers, but also deferred
maintenance and weapons programs.
Basically what you end up with is a possibility a Navy that
does not float, and an Air Force that cannot fly, and you lose
the experience, and of course, and our men and women in
uniform, which is one of our greatest assets in the military.
What happens is it becomes more of a not if, but when we have
to engage a current threat or an emerging threat, that we end
up spending more in blood and treasure than I think myself or
this country really wanted. We have to, from a strategic
standpoint, look at the future threats, and come down slowly.
I have only been here 13 months, and as you mentioned, I do
serve on the House Armed Services Committee. When I first got
here, it was then-Secretary Gates wanted $100 billion in
savings over five years, and those savings were going to be
taken and then reinvested into our military: our MWR programs,
our fitness programs, weapons, modernization maintenance. So
take the savings and reinvest it, because we have been a nation
at war, and we have a lot of equipment that is old, that is
failing, that is aged, and we have to reset that. We also need
to begin retraining troops to be able to engage in different
wars other than insurgency-type operations.
Then it went to the president wanting $78 billion in cuts,
and then now we are at $487 billion, and also with the pending
doom and violent destruction to our military that could be a
result of sequestration, all within 13 months.
Mr. Stutzman. Final question, it looks like the National
Guard, Air Guard, could be taking some cuts throughout this
sequestration or the budget process. Could you talk a little
bit about how the Guard should fit in this whole discussion,
and the value that it brings? What is your experience and what
you have heard?
Mr. Palazzo. Mr. Chairman, thank you for asking that
question. I am actually still serving in the Mississippi Army
National Guard as an NCO, and concurrently serving in Congress
and on the House armed services committee. We are going to
have, again, a lot of experience through, just the president's
own budget we are looking at a loss of up to 100,000 men and
women in uniform. What better place to place them then in the
National Guard? I cannot remember the exact statistics; I think
maybe we could retain these assets and these abilities at one-
sixth of the cost and it would have to be as if they were on
active duty. We cannot afford to lose our men and women. That
is our number one treasure, and we spent hundreds of thousands,
in some case millions of dollars, preparing, training, and
investing in these individuals and to just turn them out, turn
them loose, into a civil force. There are ways that we can
invest in our Guard. So as we do shift resources from Iraq and
Afghanistan, you would think that we would be investing more,
again, in the Guard, Army and Air, because it is a great
repository for those resources.
Mr. Stutzman. Thank you very much. Are there any other
questions from the committee? Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate,
Congressman, your being here. Your point about the potential
impact of the Guard and ready reserve as a cost containment
item resonates with me. I was disappointed that the Air Force
command decided, essentially, they were going to take their
savings at the expense of Air Force reserve. That seems to me
to be questionable, and I appreciate your comment on that.
I am a little concerned, if I understand your testimony
correctly, we had the secretary of defense testifying before us
here this last week where he was laying out the approach that
the administration has undertaken where testimony was given,
and I do not think any of us doubt, that even if all of these
cuts take place, we would still have by far the most powerful
military in the world. We are currently spending, as you know,
more than 17 other countries combined, and it is almost half of
the combined world military spending. As the secretary
testified to us, the records are so fuzzy and sloppy in the
Pentagon, that we cannot even audit it. So I want to make sure
I understand your testimony correctly, that you do not think
that we can take 1 percent out of the Pentagon budget, which is
less than was recommended by Simpson-Bowles, as proposed in the
president's budget without jeopardizing our nations' security.
Is that what you said?
Mr. Palazzo. What actually would 1 percent be?
Mr. Blumenauer. It is 527; you are the expert.
Mr. Palazzo. Yeah, well you have to look at the moving
targets. The secretary, then-Secretary Gates, and now Secretary
Panetta, they keep coming. The House Armed Services Committee
had tons of hearings under Chairman McKeon last year. What are
the effects of sequestration? What are the effects of the $487
billion in cuts?
Mr. Blumenauer. I want to be clear, because I am not trying
to mislead you. I just wanted to be clear on one point. You
testified against a $5 billion reduction, which is less than 1
percent in the current Pentagon budget. Is it your testimony
that we cannot reduce the Pentagon budget by less than 1
percent without jeopardizing our nation's security? You may
have another president next year, but you do not think we can
take less than 1 percent out now?
Mr. Palazzo. I think it needs to be slowed down.
Mr. Blumenauer. Be advised, I am just talking what you just
said there: $5 billion out of more than $527 billion.
Mr. Palazzo. You are talking about $5 billion, or 500?
Mr. Blumenauer. That is what you said, you came in and
talked about, as I understood it, the $5 billion reduction in
this year's budget.
Mr. Palazzo. I think the military can be more efficient and
more effective. I think we can find some cuts, but you know, $5
billion is not unacceptable. What I am saying, and what my
overall testimony is to this committee is we slow down, let's
make sure that the decisions that we make going forward, that
we do not hollow out our armed services, that we do not try to
balance the budget and all the financial woes on the backs of
our men and women in uniform. We just left a hearing that was
talking about BRAC, and just 13 months ago we were needing 313
ships, not 285, and now with the 30 year shipbuilding plan, are
we even going to come in at 313 or is it going to be less than
300?
So I have a lot of concerns. My number one concern, of
course, is most of the people in this committee, and in
Congress, is that we do not break the trust that we have with
our men and women in uniform, not only those currently serving,
but those who have served, as well as their families and their
communities. Again, thank you for that question.
Mr. Blumenauer. No, thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Palazzo. And I was confused, I thought we were talking
about a larger number.
Mr. Blumenauer. I appreciate the chairman s courtesy, I
appreciate your testimony. I do not think that there is anybody
in either side of the aisle that wants to break faith with the
men and women in uniform, or put something to hollow out the
military. One of the things I hope we can do going forward is
actually look at the budget because we have been increasing the
Department of Defense faster than the rate of inflation; their
benefits have been increasing faster than private benefits and
Medicare. The point you make about the size of the fleet, that
was when we could not figure that we could fly the sailors back
rather than turning the ship around, and now we are finding out
that, well, we can actually keep it in theater and use a plane.
So that there may be some adjustments that we can think of
going forward and look forward to working with you to make sure
we fine tune it right.
Mr. Palazzo. I agree, Congressman, thank you for those
comments. You did mention something else. I think you alluded
to the ability to audit the Department of Defense, going
forward, not only as members of Congress and representatives,
but with a very awesome responsibility in making these
decisions, it would be nice to be able to see exactly where the
money is being spent and whether it is being spent wisely. I
just urge caution going forward. Thank you.
Mr. Blumenauer. Great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Stutzman. All right, thank you, thank the gentleman
from Mississippi for being here and his testimony. It appears
there are not additional witnesses. This hearing is now
adjourned.
[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:]
[The prepared statement of Barbara Lee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress
From the State of California
Thank you Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen and the members
of the Budget Committee for giving me the opportunity to testify today.
Mr. Chairman, I believe strongly that the budget is a moral
document that very clearly outlines what we as a nation and a society,
hold dear.
This is especially true in difficult times, when difficult choices
must be made.
The choices we make and the lines that we draw can be stark.
Do we believe that our nation has a responsibility to help poor
children get an education, proper nutrition, and have access to quality
health care or should we preserve billions of dollars in tax credits
for oil companies that are making record profits?
Do we believe that it would be right to take away critical funding
for small business innovation and vital job training programs or should
we extend tax subsidies that send American jobs over seas?
I am a founding co-chair of the Congressional Out of Poverty, a
founding co-chair of the Congressional HIV-AIDS Caucus, a member of the
Congressional Black Caucus, a member of the Congressional Progressive
Caucus, as well as a member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American
Caucus.
For myself, and I am sure for my colleagues on these caucuses, the
choices are clear.
I believe that we can craft a sound and fiscally responsible budget
that make investments that will reduce poverty, strengthen the economy,
spark business innovation, and create jobs even as we reduce the
deficit.
I believe that it is critical to reaffirm that the needs of the
poor and most vulnerable are foremost on our minds and that we will
measure the success or failure of ourselves as a nation, based on the
success or failure of our working class families.
We cannot and we must not balance the budget on the backs of our
most vulnerable.
All Americans, not just the wealthy few, must have access to
opportunity, and must be a central part of our strength as an economy
and as a nation.
Indeed, it is only when median incomes are rising and the middle
class is growing, as it was during the Clinton Administration, that we
have a chance to reach a surplus, not just reductions in the deficit.
While it is true that our deficits are high, we must not allow an
exaggerated sense of panic to force us into making shortsighted
choices.
Such a course will only hurt our economic recovery, result in more
job losses, and lead to the elimination of critical safety net programs
that protect millions of Americans around the country, in my district
and in the districts of every single member.
Let me be clear, we do not have to abandon Americans in poverty or
fail to invest in working class families to reduce our deficits and pay
down our debts.
In fact it is only by committing to reducing poverty and lifting
working class Americans up into the middle class, that we can
strengthen our economy, improve our competitiveness and reduce our
deficits in the long term.
We must come together to lift up the millions and millions of
Americans who are working full time, but are still living in poverty.
There are 100 million more who are working hard everyday, but are
trapped by stagnating wages and high costs and lack the upward mobility
of the generation that came before them.
We cannot reduce our deficits simply by cutting food for hungry
children or stripping our schools of computers and new books.
We must take a hard look at our priorities and make smart and
targeted investments that will restore economic mobility and reignite
the American Dream for all Americans.
Poverty and economic stagnation isn't just a burden for this
generation, but slows the growth and development of every generation
that follows.
We must immediately address the chronically unemployed who have
grown by 441% since 2008 by providing them with the emergency funding
to extend, not cut, Unemployment Insurance to those who have exhausted
their benefits.
Nearly 3 million families will be abruptly cut off this year as
emergency extensions of UI run out and they find themselves with no
income and nowhere to turn.
That is why the FY2013 budget must not only respond to families in
crisis during the recession, it must strengthen our long-term
commitment to human needs and social service programs so that we can r
citizens from keeping themselves afloat even in the most prosperous of
times.
Economic opportunity for all is a value that defines the United
States, and it is the responsibility of this Congress to make sure that
our guiding principles are turned into a reality for all Americans.
We must embrace a budget that provides a proven pathway out of
poverty to prosperity for all Americans.
We can do all these things and more, but first we must have a
serious discussion about our priorities and how we can pay for them.
Mr. Chairman, I support reducing the deficit. But cutting non-
defense discretionary spending alone will not solve the problem. We
need to talk about raising revenues, about repealing tax cuts to the
most wealthy, and ending the longest war this country has ever faced.
Americans want a land that is rich with opportunity for all and not
just the privileged few.
I urge every member of the Budget Committee to give a full and fair
consideration of the Congressional Progressive Caucus budget
alternative. The CPC budget, if enacted, would save more money than any
of the proposed budgets, would reach balance faster than any of the
proposed budgets and would balance the necessary savings with the
critical investments in our nation's people and infrastructure to make
us stronger and more prosperous now and into the future.
I thank the Committee once again for the opportunity to share my
testimony and I respectfully request that my full statement and a
detailed list of the budget priorities I have outlined be included in
the record.
[The prepared statement of Mike Coffman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Coffman, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Colorado
Dear Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen: Thank you for the
opportunity to express to you my principal interest regarding the 2013
federal budget.
On behalf of my constituents, I ask that you take this opportunity
to act upon the urgent need to save Medicare. The status quo is simply
not possible any longer, because the new health care reform law passed
in 2010 already cut more than $500 billion from Medicare and approved
an unelected board of bureaucrats who will decide what care patients
may receive. Obviously, there will be consequences from these cuts and
changes. Nearly one-in-three primary care doctors (according to the
American Medical Association) are limiting the number of Medicare
patients they see, and more than half of doctors say the law will
compel them to close or restrict their practices for Medicare patients
(according to the Physicians Foundation).
On top of these problems, Medicare faces significant stress form
other factors. More than 10,000 Baby Boomers are reaching retirement
age every single day, and Americans are living about a decade longer
than they did in 1965 when Medicare was created. As you know, Richard
Foster, Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services,
testified before your committee that the Medicare Hospital Insurance
trust fund will be insolvent in 2024.
For our country's seniors, including my own mother in Aurora,
Colorado, Medicare is a life line. And so, as you formulate our
nation's fiscal plan for upcoming years, you must include not only
necessary spending levels to guarantee that our senior's receive the
healthcare coverage they need, but you also must negate the destructive
changes inflicted on Medicare under the healthcare changes made by
President Obama and his congressional allies. As you do so, first and
foremost, no changes should be made for those in or near retirement
age. Instead, those looking to retire in ten years or later need the
ability to choose from a list of assured coverage options which best
suit their needs, including an option to retain the current Medicare
program. Low-income individuals should receive greater support, as well
as those with higher health risks. Efforts to increase the fight
against waste, fraud and abuse need to be included, to assure financial
stability.
This is not only my principal interest, but also the principal
interest of thousands of my constituents. I appreciate your attention
to this vital matter.
[The prepared statement of Bob Goodlatte follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Goodlatte, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Virginia
Thank you for allowing me to testify before you today.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote: ``To preserve [the] independence [of
the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We
must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and
servitude.'' Unfortunately, Congress has all-too-often chosen the
latter path.
We have a spending addiction in Washington, D.C., and it has proven
to be an addiction that Congress cannot control on its own. We have
gone in a few short years from a deficit of billions of dollars to a
deficit of trillions of dollars. We are printing money at an
unprecedented pace, which presents significant risks of inflation. Our
debt is currently an unfathomable 15 and a half trillion dollars and
mounting rapidly, as is the waste associated with paying the interest
on that debt. Yet, Congress has done little to address this crisis. It
is clear that Congress needs pressure from outside to force it to rein
in this out-of-control behavior.
Families all across our nation understand what it means to make
tough decisions each day about what they can and cannot afford. Yet far
too frequently this fundamental principle has been lost on a Congress
that is too busy spending to pay attention to the bottom line. If
Americans must exercise restraint with their own funds, then government
officials must be required to exercise an even higher standard when
spending other peoples' hard-earned income.
On the first day of the 112th Congress, I re-introduced
legislation, H.J.Res. 2, to deliver to Congress the necessary pressure
to rein in spending. My legislation would amend the United States
Constitution to require a balanced federal budget each year. 242
bipartisan cosponsors have joined this effort and the legislation
received 261 votes on the House Floor this past fall. It would require
that total spending for any fiscal year not exceed total receipts and
require the President to propose budgets to Congress that are balanced
each year. It would provide an exception in times of war and during
military conflicts that pose imminent and serious military threats to
national security, as well as in other emergency situations. It would
make it harder to increase taxes by requiring that legislation to
increase revenue be passed by a true majority of each chamber and not
just a majority of those present and voting. Furthermore, the bill
requires a \3/5\ majority vote for any increases in the debt limit.
Our nation faces many difficult decisions in the coming years, and
Congress faces great pressure to spend beyond its means rather than
make the difficult decisions about spending priorities.
I thank the Chairman for his Leadership in confronting our fiscal
crisis and his work toward wresting control of our spiraling deficits
and debt through the budget process. I encourage you to enact the
toughest budget possible for Fiscal Year 2013 that eliminates our
deficit in as few years as possible. I will support the strongest
efforts to rein in the federal government's spending spree.
However, we need to keep in mind that even if Congress enacts a
budget that makes significant progress toward achieving balance within
a short period of time, the reality is that if a new Congress is
elected that favors spending over fiscal responsibility, all the work
that this Committee does could be overturned and the progress toward
achieving balance could be turned on its head.
Unless each Congress--regardless of party affiliation--is forced to
make the decisions necessary to create a balanced budget, the
temptation will always be there for Congress to spend more than it
receives in revenues. That is the advantage of a Constitutional
Balanced Budget Amendment, which would ensure that the principle of
fiscal responsibility is forced upon all future Congresses. The BBA is
a common sense approach to ensure that Congress is bound by the same
fiscal principles that America's families face each day.
I urge this committee to demonstrate leadership by balancing the
federal budget in as few years as possible, and I continue to urge
support of a balanced budget Constitutional amendment to ensure that
future Congresses are not allowed to continue to saddle our children
and grandchildren with debt that is not their own.
[The prepared statement of Janice Hahn follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Janice Hahn, a Representative in Congress
From the State of California
Thank you Mr. Chairman for allowing me to testify before the
committee today and discuss some of the issues that are important to me
and my constituents.
port security grants
Ports are the gateway in and out of the United States. They are our
country's link to the rest of the world and the global economy.
As someone who founded the Congressional Ports Caucus and whose
district borders the Port of Los Angeles, one of the largest ports in
the country, I feel very strongly that ports must remain competitive
and secure given its importance to our national economy.
That's why I believe the Port Security Grant Program is so
important.
The Port Security Grant Program helps strengthen our homeland
security by providing vital funding to port areas for enhancing their
capability to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from attacks
involving improvised explosive devices, Chemical, Biological, Nuclear
explosives, and other non-conventional weapons.
This program, along with other state and local programs, also helps
ensure that our first responders have the tools they need to make sure
they are adequately prepared to swiftly and effectively respond to
threats of all kinds.
However, under the Presidents FY 2013 budget request, this program,
along with other state and local programs, will collapse into one
National Preparedness Grant Program.
Now I applaud the President's effort to begin awarding grants based
on risk as well as his request to increase the total overall funding
from last year.
However, there is a danger that lumping all of them into one
singular program will run the risk of diluting critical funding for
these major programs.
Additionally, the increased funding from the President's budget
only represents a total increase from last year and is still
significantly below its funding from previous years.
For example, even though the President's request for state and
local programs represents an increase of $609 million from last year's
budget, it is still a $480 million (14%) decrease from FY 2011.
This combined with the fact that these programs are now forced to
split funding with one another, make me greatly concerned for the
future of port security in this country.
Potential cuts to these grants will result in gaps being left
unaddressed and security officials unable to build and sustain
capabilities needed to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from a
potential attack.
That's why I would urge this committee to make sure that any future
budget support increased funding for the Port Security Grant Program.
tsunami warning system
While port security will continue to be a major focus within the
homeland security landscape, Tsunami preparedness is also a growing
issue that deserves more attention within this congress.
As we have seen with the March 2011 Tsunami that hit Japan, an
effective public alert warning system is needed to save lives. The
devastation that resulted from this incident resulted in over 15,000
deaths in Japan and billions of dollars in property damage worldwide,
including a death and significant property damage in California.
As the representative of the 36th district of California, my
district borders the port of Los Angeles as the Alameda Corridor and
LAX Airport.
If a Tsunami were to hit my district, the resulting devastation
would be disastrous, not only for my constituents, but for the country
as a whole.
The need to strengthen existing national public alert systems are
essential to make sure that states, such as my home state of
California, are sufficiently protected against these types of
disasters.
That is why I have recently signed onto a letter supporting
adequate funding for the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program
(NTHMP) and the Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting Tsunamis (DART)
buoys that will make sure people are adequately prepared if such an
emergency were ever to occur.
I urge this committee to please consider the importance of these
programs as you continue preparing next year's budget.
Thank you and yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of James R. Langevin follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. James R. Langevin, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Rhode Island
Good afternoon. I would like to thank Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member
Van Hollen and the distinguished Members of the Budget Committee for
this opportunity to testify before you today regarding important
priorities in the Fiscal Year 2013 budget.
As Co-Chair of the Congressional Career and Technical Education
Caucus, I have seen that a failure to engage our students has hurt our
country's innovative edge and left us unable to fill the jobs of the
21st Century. In a survey of 2,000 firms conducted by the McKinsey
Global Institute, 40 percent had positions open for at least six months
because they couldn't find suitable candidates. While there is no one
way to solve all of our economic challenges, we know improving
workforce development has a vital role to play.
For this reason, I am advocating for $1.27 billion for career and
technical education funding in Fiscal Year 2013. A revamped career and
technical education system would allow school districts to develop
integrated curricula of academics and technical programs that align
with postsecondary education and career opportunities. This system will
produce college- and career- ready students who have received relevant
and rigorous academics and real-world experience that prepares them for
a wide range of high-growth, high-skilled and high-wage occupations,
such as engineering, arts and media, cybersecurity and health care.
Across the country, teachers and school administrators will be able
to collaborate on an interdisciplinary approach that leverages
partnerships with local businesses and community organizations to
identify workforce demands and internship opportunities. This
collaboration is already taking place at the Providence Career and
Technical Academy, where students have the opportunity to see a glimpse
of the world beyond the classroom and their interests and talents are
nurtured. I am pleased that President Obama's budget provides support
to expand the academy network.
In visits to businesses, I repeatedly hear they are struggling to
fill openings because applicants lack necessary skills. Addressing this
problem requires better cooperation between the businesses doing the
hiring and the educators preparing the students, particularly within
the career and technical training at our community colleges. That is
why I support President Obama's $8 billion budget initiative to create
partnerships between community colleges and expanding industries that
will train workers with skills that lead directly to jobs. I hope my
colleagues agree that this effort should transcend politics and will
work with me to implement this policy of educational cooperation and
economic growth.
I am pleased to report that such cooperatives are already
successfully growing in my district. National Grid, our state's primary
utility, needs a new generation of workers who can fix utility lines
and maintain interconnected networks of electricity. The Community
College of Rhode Island has the facilities to offer a certificate
program in energy utility technology for relatively low tuition. With
grants and an investment from National Grid, the school provides high-
level math skills and utilizes state of the art equipment to prepare
students, while the company provides 64 hours of hands-on training at
its facility. Upon completion, the students are uniquely prepared to
become new employees.
You couldn't ask for a more efficient program, and it should serve
as a model for any company or industry seeking talented employees. Of
course, the resources that CCRI, or any college, must invest in these
initiatives costs money. At a time of strapped state budgets, many
can't accommodate the programs necessary to match our workers with
high-skilled jobs.
The President's Community College to Career Fund is a small price
to pay for the benefit of placing more workers into rewarding jobs that
allow them to support their families without relying on a government
safety net. We must work together to make this program a reality.
Many of our constituents have rightfully lost faith that this
Congress can make substantial progress on the most meaningful issues.
There may be some differences we cannot overcome, but supporting these
programs should be common sense if our number one goal is to put
Americans back to work.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee, and
I look forward to working with you on our shared priorities going
forward.
[The prepared statement of John Lewis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Lewis, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Georgia
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and Members of
the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to share my concerns and
priorities for the fiscal year 2013 budget.
For the past five years, Americans have struggled to overcome the
most significant economic downturn since the Great Depression. A few
years ago, Congress responded in an extraordinary manner--attempting to
mitigate the massive impact of the crisis on hardest hit communities.
The President's FY13 budget proposal continues some of these
critical investments and common-sense savings. It provides a clearer
plan to end the costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which have depleted
our reserves and budget surpluses. We simply cannot afford to drain our
investments at home in support of war abroad. The administration should
be applauded for the strong support of America's veterans. We must
provide adequate funding for mental health and post traumatic stress
disorder services, homeless veterans programs, workload reduction
services, and veterans' employment and training services.
Now more than ever, we must invest in America's safety net and pave
the path towards job creation. As you know, small business is the
backbone of our economy. I truly believe that Department of Commerce
and Small Business Administration programs which educate, train, and
make funds available to small, medium-sized, women, minority, and
veteran-owned businesses are an integral component of the economic
recovery process. Similar to proposals included in the President's
American Jobs Act, I recently introduced a bill--the Back to Basics
Jobs Act--which is similar to ideas included in the President's plan;
this bill would establish an immediate, one-time initiative to help the
long-term unemployed, those who have exhausted unemployment benefits,
and low-income individuals become gainfully self-employed, and create
livable-wage jobs instantly.
In order to realize the goals of another key jobs effort--the
National Export Initiative--Congress must also fully fund the
Interagency Trade Enforcement Center (ITEC), the Trade Adjustment
Assistance for Firms Program, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership,
and the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Community Colleges and Career
Training Program. American businesses must be able to compete with our
global competitors, and these programs help level the playing field.
Innovative economic development and redevelopment programs must be
continued, and programs that provide housing assistance for the most
vulnerable--the elderly, homeless youth, women, children, and
struggling families--must be protected.
Any and every way that we can help hard-working Americans efforts
get back on their feet are keys to our long-term recovery. Income
security programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,
Unemployment Insurance, Medicaid, and COBRA should continue to be a
cornerstone of this year's budget. Especially now, I strongly object to
proposed cuts to anti-poverty initiatives like the Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Program, the Assets for Independence Program, the
Community Services Block Grant, Job Corps, and the Clean Water and
Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs).
Special attention should be given for these and other anti-poverty
initiatives like the Public Housing (Operating and Capital Funds), HOPE
VI, Homeless Assistance, Supportive Housing programs for the Disabled
and Elderly, the Child Care and Development Block Grant, the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program, the Social Services Block Grant, Women,
Infants and Children Program (WIC), and the HOME Investment
Partnerships Program. I am very concerned with the HOME program's
levels and the loss of family unification vouchers, but I strongly
favor of the restoration of housing counseling funds.
During times like these, it is vital that regulatory agencies have
the appropriate resources and tools to shield our constituents from
predatory and discriminatory practices. Supporting the Consumer
Financial Protection Board, the National Mediation Board, the National
Labor Relations Board, and the National Transportation Safety Board
ensures that our road to recovery does not come at the expense of our
national standards and core values. Staffing agencies like the Internal
Revenue Service adequately helps our constituents receive their tax
returns more quickly, while allowing the government to collect overdue
revenue efficiently and effectively.
This brings me to another important issue that needs to be
addressed across the board--treatment of federal workers in the budget
and appropriations process. Few of my colleagues realize that more
federal employees serve our constituents from agencies across the
country than in Washington, D.C. Not only are they public servants, but
they are also taxpayers, and this constant assault is unnecessary.
Federal employees' retirement and salaries should not be the pay-for
proposal for every tax cut extension and new bill. For example, we can
start with cutting funding for war. My no-cost bill, the Cost of War
Act, would help every American taxpayer calculate the cost of war to
their household. Investments in America's safety net cannot be the
victim of unfunded conflicts.
As you know, I have long represented the area with the longest
Social Security Disability Appeals backlog in the country. I know that
the Social Security Administration has been working hard to reduce the
backlog, and significant progress has been made. Underfunding the
Social Security Administration now will result in a massive set-back,
not only in hearing disability appeals, but more immediately, in
constituent services by phone and in person and prompt payments--not
just in Metro Atlanta, but across the country.
I continue to strongly support restoring funding for the Children's
Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program, and continued
funding for the Ryan White Care Act, the National Center on Minority
Health and Health Disparities, the Maternal and Child Health Block
Grants, and the Public Health Training Program. We must continue to
invest in health information technology, and more resources for the
training and hiring health professionals--nurses, doctors, and other
health providers--who provide frontline health services in minority and
underserved communities. We all know that prevention is far less costly
than treatment.
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is also located
in my congressional district. We must continue to fund CDC's important
activities so that doctors, patients and communities have the
information and tools they need to protect their health and prevent
disease and injury.
Perhaps most important for unemployed and dislocated workers in my
state is an expansion of worker training and continuing educational
opportunities. Increased discretionary funding for YouthBuild and
vocational education initiatives will help build a skilled workforce
for generations to come.
Education is the key to our future. I applaud the Administration's
commitment to college affordability by fully funding Pell Grants
through 2015. It is also important that children and young people have
the tools for success from an early age; this is why funding for the No
Child Left Behind Act, Title I, IDEA, STEM and Arts in Education
programs are key. There are a number of outstanding Historically Black
Colleges and Universities in my congressional district. They continue
to struggle to compete with better-endowed institutions. Their benefit
to current and future generations is enormous. It is my hope that funds
authorized in the Higher Education Act for these important institutions
are realized and that discretionary grants for key historic
preservation and educational endeavors are included in this year's
budget.
A strong national transportation grid is an integral component of
our economic recovery and global competitiveness. The economic crisis
has forced many transit agencies to decrease services and increase
costs making it more difficult for both low-income, and/ or
environmentally-aware workers to seek and reach their jobs. People need
to commute to work, business, school, and spend tourist dollars in a
timely, safe, and affordable manner.
I strongly support the President's bold investment National
Infrastructure Bank and continued funding for transportation
initiatives. We must continue to invest in transit and provide as much
funding and flexibility as possible to struggling transit systems. I
recently joined a bipartisan coalition of my congressional colleagues
in strongly opposing any attempt to restructure the financing for or
eliminate the Mass Transit Account.
I would also like to commend the President for his increased
support to ports preparing for the 2014 expansion of the Panama Canal.
Falling behind our global competitors is simply not an option. I
oppose, however, the proposed reduction to the Grants-in-Aid for
Airports Program. My congressional district is home to Hartsfield-
Jackson Atlanta International Airport, the world's largest passenger
airport, and a key job provider in my district. We must continue to
invest in models that work.
While the passage of the FAA reauthorization was long overdue, and
the investments in NextGen technology are critical, now is not the time
to cut funding to airports, which have applied federal funds wisely.
Passengers should not be forced to bear the brunt of these cuts. Local
transit and traffic congestion projects, port expansion, safety, and
security initiatives create jobs throughout our state and sustain our
role in the global economy.
I continue to support any and all efforts that would reduce our
nation's dependence on foreign sources of energy, expand the production
and use of clean alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles,
promote renewable energy development, improve electricity transmission,
and reward conservation and efficiency. Rising energy costs are simply
unsustainable. Green jobs and technology are an integral part of our
economic future.
Similar to many other localities, many local governments continue
to face budget challenges. I strongly support the President's budget
proposals to fund anti-crime initiatives at the local level. Juvenile
Justice Programs, Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, the Second Chance
Act, and Court Appointed Special Advocate funds are lifelines for many
initiatives in my congressional district. Aiding our first responders
through adequate and increased discretionary funding for airports,
firefighters, and local law enforcement will improve communication,
identify and respond to potential threats in a timely manner, and keep
our communities safer.
By investing on the front end to prevent dangerous behaviors, we
save money in the long-term. There should be increased attention to
service initiatives like H.R. 3075, the National Parents Corps Act, an
initiative started by former President George W. Bush that successfully
reduced drug abuse and criminal activities in middle-and high schools
across the country.
The President also included proposals similar to my bill, the SMART
Teen Dating Violence Prevention Act, which streamlines existing youth
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) programs to break the cycle of
violence at the root. Congress must come together in a bipartisan way
to reauthorize and fully fund the Violence Against Women Act and the
William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Act this year.
Time and time again, economic studies have shown that peace is so
much more inexpensive than war and violence. Two of my bills, the
Gandhi-King Scholarly Exchange Initiative Act and the SAFETY through
Nonviolence Act create a new generation of leaders committed to peace
and nonviolence. Both bills are low-cost, but provide significant
impacts. The President's budget recognizes this investment by
continuing funding for the U.S. Institute of Peace and highlighting
USIP's work as a key component of our withdrawal from Iraq and
Afghanistan.
As a Member of the Congressional Black Caucus, I also applaud
Secretary Clinton for the swift and continued response to the
humanitarian crisis in the Horn of Africa and the creation of the Race,
Ethnicity, and Social Inclusion Unit (RESIUNIT) which plays a key role
in the U.S.-Colombia Action Plan on Racial and Ethnic Equality, and the
U.S. Brazil Joint Action Plan to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic
Discrimination and Promote Equality. We all are struggling with the
loss of our foreign affairs leader--Congressman Payne. I would like to
applaud Administrator Shah for his recognition of the tireless work of
my good friend and colleague with the creation of the Donald Payne
Fellowship Program. Despite our work in the Middle East and North
Africa region, these initiatives must be fully funded and protected.
I would like to close by commending the Administration for their
support of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American
History and Culture, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the
National Endowment for the Humanities. Preserving our history and
culture not only bring tourists from all over the world, but also
create jobs in the humanities and the arts.
As always, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and Members of the
Committee, I thank you for the opportunity to share some of my
priorities on the fiscal year 2013 budget. I remain available to
discuss these issues with you in the future and look forward to working
with you.
[The prepared statement of John L. Mica follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John L. Mica, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Florida
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, and Members of the
Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to present my views on the
fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget resolution as it relates to programs
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
In light of the urgent need to reduce the Federal budget deficit,
the Committee is recommending funding reductions for many programs
within its jurisdiction. These recommendations are detailed in the
Committee's Views and Estimates, which were approved earlier today and
will be transmitted to you shortly.
As it has done over the past year, the Committee will continue to
examine programs within its jurisdiction to cut costs, consolidate
facilities, eliminate waste, and create efficiencies. In addition, the
Committee will work to ensure that infrastructure investments funded by
these programs are those that make sense and yield the greatest benefit
for the least cost.
Last month, the Committee successfully concluded a five-year effort
to reauthorize federal aviation programs. Despite resistance from the
other body, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-65)
ultimately authorized a decrease in funding for the Federal Aviation
Administration, and made significant reforms to the Essential Air
Service (EAS) program. For FY 2013, the Committee recommends reducing
FAA funding by $130 million (-0.08 percent) below the FY 2012 enacted
level, consistent with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act. In
addition, the Committee supports the recently-enacted reforms to the
EAS program, which will save about $16 million per year in the near-
term.
As you know, we must also reauthorize surface transportation
programs this year. The previous authorization for these programs, the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), expired at the end of FY 2009. Since
that time, the highway, transit, highway safety, and motor carrier
safety programs have been operating under a series of eight short-term
extensions, the most recent of which extends the programs through March
31, 2012.
Last month, the Committee approved H.R. 7, the American Energy and
Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012, which authorizes surface
transportation programs through FY 2016. H.R. 7 provides the stable and
predictable funding stream that is necessary for the efficient
implementation of long lead-time construction programs such as these.
In addition, H.R. 7 accomplishes more with less through significant
reforms including cutting in half the time it takes to complete major
infrastructure projects. H.R. 7 establishes a blueprint for job
creation, is responsibly paid for, and includes no earmarks, tax
increases or deficit spending.
The Committee continues to believe that H.R. 7 is the best way
forward on surface transportation reauthorization, and requests that
the FY 2013 budget resolution provide to our Committee an allocation
sufficient to accommodate this legislation.
The Committee also hopes to complete work on legislation to
reauthorize the United States Coast Guard this year. In November 2011,
the House passed H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Act of 2011. This bill currently awaits action by the Senate. For FY
2013, the Committee recommends $8.77 billion for the Coast Guard,
consistent with the level authorized in H.R. 2838 as passed by the
House.
In addition to reauthorization of surface transportation programs
and the Coast Guard, the Committee's other legislative priorities this
year include reauthorization of hazardous materials transportation
safety programs, the Economic Development Administration, and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, and development of a water
resources development act. As the Committee moves forward on each of
these bills, it will continue to recognize the need to constrain
federal spending and reform programs to ensure the best use of scarce
resources.
The Committee believes that properly targeted investment in
transportation and infrastructure programs is necessary to ensure the
safe and efficient movement of people and goods, increase economic
growth, and maintain our global economic competitiveness. I look
forward to working with you to ensure that such investments are made,
and that the budget resolution accommodates the important legislation
within the Committee's jurisdiction that must be enacted this year.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to present these views.
[The prepared statement of Cedric L. Richmond follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Cedric L. Richmond, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Louisiana
Mr. Chairman thank you for allowing me to testify to my budget
priorities for Fiscal Year 2013. It has been said that budgets reflect
our values. This is absolutely true, and is more important than ever
that we invest in priorities that are consistent with our character as
a nation and that will leave our families and communities stronger for
the future. We must invest in economic growth items and in human
capital so that we can lay the proper foundation for our children to
compete with their peers in other nations in the decades ahead. There
are a number of areas that deserve significant investment if we are to
preserve our standing and create an environment where private sector
led growth can help my constituents in the 2nd District of Louisiana
pursue the American dream. That being said, given the limited time
today, I will focus on three areas in particular that I hope the
Committee takes under advisement as it works to craft its FY 2013
Budget Resolution. I want to emphasize that these investments are
critical and the Committee should explore the best way to make them
within the allowable parameters of the Budget Control Act of 2011.
First and foremost we have to ensure that our families and our
neighbors have access to quality healthcare. The President's budget
requests $3.1 billion to help provide critical access to communities
across the country. This significant investment represents progress in
the right direction as more and more of our elderly, and low-income
citizens are turning towards Community Health Centers. It is crucial
that we fund Primary Care for those in need, not only as a moral
obligation, but also to curb higher health care costs down the line.
Community Health Centers are making a difference in neighborhoods
across America and are crucial to us in New Orleans, especially after
the loss of our historic Charity Hospital. For example, Jefferson
Community Health Care Center operates two sites and with a 2-year grant
period has employed 32 staffers, including 9 providers. They provide
the critical preventive care that many in our communities cannot get
anywhere else. Creating new access points and continuing the work of
Community Health Centers is a key for our cities and rural areas
providing the care every American deserves. I urge the Committee to
reflect the President's request in its resolution.
Second, we must continue to increase investments in our
infrastructure needs, especially our ports, harbors and hurricane
protection efforts. Most ports and harbors require dredging to combat
the accumulation of sediment. As sediment collects, ships are forced to
carry less cargo, increasing transportation costs, and making our
businesses less competitive on the global market. Shippers have paid
billions of tax dollars into the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF)
specifically for the purpose of keeping channels dredged to authorized
depths. Unfortunately, much of this funding sits idle in the HMTF. This
has resulted in a growing surplus in the HMTF of more than $6 billion,
while dredging needs continue to be unmet. Appropriations for
maintenance dredging in a typical year total only about half of what is
collected from the Harbor Maintenance Tax. The Administration's request
for FY 2013, while a slight increase from previous years, continues
this trend by only allocating around half of projected collections to
the HMTF's intended purposes. We must do better.
Adequate dredging will decrease the cost of consumer goods, lessen
the potential for groundings and spills, and increase the
environmentally friendly, cost-effective movement of goods to market.
Currently 99.4 percent of the overall tonnages of U.S. overseas exports
move through the nation's seaports. Only two of the top ten seaports in
the U.S. are dredged to their authorized dimensions--Los Angeles and
Long Beach, CA. Thus, full funding of dredging is vital to achieving
the President's goal of increasing our exports over the next five
years.
As you formulate the FY2013 Budget Resolution, I request that the
Committee apportion the entire budget financed by the Harbor
Maintenance Tax for maintenance dredging purposes for our nation's
ports and harbors.
In addition to investing in our ports, we must give the Army Corps
the resources it needs to maintain critical projects across the nation
that are critical to commerce and the preservation of human life.
I ask that the Committee's Resolution reflects anticipated funding
requests for hurricane protection construction and maintenance. For
example, in FY2014, the Corps will require additional funding to
operate and maintain several key facilities that make up the Inner
Harbor Navigation Canal-Lake Borgne Storm Surge Barrier. In addition,
new levee embankments constructed in southeast Louisiana for the
Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS) are settling
so dramatically that keeping them high enough will require extra lifts
for many years. This is because the combined effect of levee subsidence
and sea level rise is occurring at a faster rate than the originally
estimated by the Corps. Thus, additional ``levee lifts'' will need to
be funded in order that the HSDRRS provide a minimum of 100 year flood
protection. Please keep these priorities in mind because the
investments we make in local projects have broad national impact.
Finally, we must invest more in economic development, with a focus
on small business development and access to capital for those in
underserved areas. We must invest in small businesses because they are
the engine of job growth in our country. The Administration's $949
million request is a small price to pay for the economic benefits that
the Small Business Administration confers on our nation's
entrepreneurs. SBA's investments in contracting, access to capital and
technical assistance resources help small firms at every stage, from
startup to mature job creator. Underfunding this critical agency will
only serve to hurt American firms that represent the very essence of
American entrepreneurial spirit. We must also invest in the Minority
Business Development Agency by meeting or exceeding the budget
authority that reflects the Administration's $29 million FY 2013
request. The MBDA plays a crucial role in helping historically
economically challenged firms improve the economic narratives in their
communities. It provides sorely needed resources that drive job
creation and innovation and will help the U.S. achieve its export
oriented growth strategy. Minority firms currently export to 41 nations
across the globe, and a robust investment in MBDA can leverage these
opportunities appropriately. Last, but not least, we must provide the
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund with the proper level
of resources to ensure that it can continue to promote sustainable
opportunity in underserved neighborhoods. The programs administered by
the CDFI Fund, including the New Markets Tax Credit program, make
incredible contributions to economic growth in my district and across
the country. The capital provided by the CDFI's drives job and wealth
creation in areas that have previously experienced great challenge.
I am hopeful that the Budget Resolution reflects the
Administration's $229 million request.
Thank you for presenting me with the opportunity to highlight the
areas in the FY 2013 Budget that are critical to economic growth and
opportunity in the 2nd District of Louisiana. It is my home. I grew up
there and I have served it my entire adult life. I know that we have
made some strides as we continue to rebuild from recent devastating
challenges. But more must be done. I look forward to working with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to craft a budget that promotes
growth and opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan
follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, a Delegate
in Congress From the Northern Mariana Islands
Dear Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen: Thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony on the difficulties the U.S. Insular
Areas face regarding federal data collection efforts and how Congress
can play a role in helping these efforts. The U.S. island territories
lag far behind the states in terms of priority, availability,
timeliness and types of data collection and the federal government has
been slow in responding to the need to provide improvement and reform.
This lack of information prevents federal and local governments from
objectively measuring local activity and hinders effective planning.
Sound policy depends on sound data and without accurate numbers on the
economy, on employment, and on income levels, policymakers are less
able to make informed decisions. It is difficult for governments and
the public to know if policies are effective, when there is little or
no objective numbers to measure against.
Federal government departments and agencies collect, compile, and
often analyze data in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico concerning many aspects of state or local economies,
workforces, and households. These data collection programs occur more
frequently than the decennial census, and provide timely information of
value to state and local governments and to the federal government when
considering the allocation of resources to states and localities. For
the most part, however, insular areas are not included in these data
collection efforts. Insular areas, by virtue of their small and
unsteady economies, limited local data collection and analyses
resources, and modest financial means, would greatly benefit by federal
collection and compilation of such data and, as members of the United
States family, merit the same level of federal support in this regard
as the states receive. Some federal data collection efforts include
some, but not all, insular areas; other efforts simply exclude all
insular areas. Federal funding for any data collection, compilation, or
analysis programs applicable to the mainland should also include
sufficient funding, and a mandate, for those efforts to extend to the
insular areas.
The U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics is ``the
principal Federal agency responsible for measuring labor market
activity, working conditions, and price changes in the economy. Its
mission is to collect, analyze, and disseminate essential economic
information to support public and private decision-making.'' The
Northern Mariana Islands, however, is not included in the BLS's state-
or local-level data concerning employment, unemployment, pay and
benefits, or workplace injuries. All of this data would be valuable not
only to the Commonwealth government for its internal use, but also
would assist public and private organizations in applying for federal
grants.
Similarly, the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey
(ACS), a survey that provides data every year, gives communities the
current information they need to properly plan investments and
services, is not conducted in the insular areas. Data derived from the
ACS help determine how more than $400 billion in federal and state
funds are distributed annually. Likewise, the Census Bureau's Small
Area Income & Poverty Estimates program, designed to ``provide updated
estimates of income and poverty statistics for the administration of
federal programs and the allocation of federal funds to local
jurisdictions,'' omits the insular areas.
There is clearly a need for the insular areas to have the same type
of data available to the states. Therefore, I respectfully request
sufficient budgetary resources to provide for data collection in the
U.S. insular areas equivalent and comparable to data collected by the
agencies of the federal government for all other parts of the nation.
[The prepared statement of Robert T. Schilling follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert T. Schilling, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Illinois
Chairman Ryan and Ranking Member Van Hollen: I believe that current
law promotes and perpetuates the idea of wasteful, hurry-up, end-of-
year spending. Therefore, I have introduced H.R. 3376, the Savings vs.
Over Spending Act to promote smarter, reduced spending throughout the
federal government and I believe this mechanism should be considered
for inclusion in the budget the House will soon consider.
As a small business owner, I know that giving employees incentives
for efficient, high-quality work is part of a business model for
success. Saving taxpayer money while preserving a strong level of
service represents common sense, but the government's current ``use it
or lose it'' system, which incentivizes agencies to find ways to spend
dollars that they do not need to spend to carry out their mission, has
resulted in too much wasteful spending.
According to a 1980 report by the Senate Committee on Government
Affairs, while ``spending at year-end may be the result of legitimate,
planned, and worthwhile spending intended by congress...the
Subcommittee (on Oversight of Government Management) found numerous
examples in which agencies took short cuts in the last few weeks of the
fiscal year that led to questionable contracts.'' Furthermore, ``Hurry-
up procurement practices resulted in the purchase of millions of
dollars worth of goods and services for which there was no demonstrated
current need.''
It's time that government agencies had some ``skin in the game''
when it comes to incentives to saving taxpayers money. Under the
Savings vs. Over Spending Act, all Executive, Judicial and Legislative
agencies would be incentivized to save money from their salaries and
expenses. For any amounts saved by an agency at the end of a fiscal
year, 50 percent would go towards deficit reduction and 50 percent
would be returned to the agency that saved the money, to be carried
over and spent at their discretion during the next fiscal year. This
money would not be able to be carried over on a multi-year basis.
The federal government should proactively pursue solutions for
smarter spending by government agencies, not encourage end-of-year
waste. Again, thank you for the opportunity to raise awareness of this
legislation.
[The prepared statement of Kurt Schrader follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kurt Schrader, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Oregon
Mr. Chairman, thank you for taking the time to hear from Members of
the House of Representatives on the FY2013 budget resolution. I know
you share my concerns for the growing fiscal imbalances in federal
finances.
The National Debt stood at nearly $15.5 trillion when this week
began. Of that total roughly $4.7 trillion is held by the government;
the lion's share of that being owed to the Social Security Trust Fund
which will need to transfer those holdings to the public as the trust
fund pays itself out over the next twenty-five years. Despite this
mountain of debt, Congress, just last month, added over $100 billion to
this year's trillion dollar deficit by passing an unpaid for payroll
tax cut.
Clearly the deal reached between the White House, Senate, and House
of Representatives to pass the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 on
August 1, 2011 was a only a start to badly needed fiscal reforms. In
FY2013 we must stick to the discretionary spending caps set by the BCA
to cut $900 billion in deficits in the next ten years and not flinch in
the face of sequestration if we are to give financial markets and job
creators any cause for hope.
The fact of the matter is we must also go several steps further,
beyond the additional $1.2 trillion in spending cuts needed to avoid
sequestration in 2013. My priority for the FY2013 budget is to help lay
the ground work for a grand bargain, to put and use everything on the
table to reduce deficits over the next ten years by more than $4
trillion.
Deficit reductions of $4 trillion over the next ten years are only
the beginning. Responsible spending caps and tax policies will be
needed to spur and maintain the fiscal responsibility and economic
growth necessary to bring our budget into balance nearly thirty years
from now. Every day we wait, implementing and sticking with a solution
grows exponentially more difficult.
After years of irresponsible spending and tax policies it is time
for us to put aside partisan gamesmanship and do what is right for the
nation.
Nobody wants automatic spending cuts to indiscriminately hit
federal programs. The whole point of having sequestration was to force
congressional action by making the cost of inaction immediately too
high. The cost of reversing course now would be even higher. This
leaves us but one option for restoring faith in our legislative process
and providing for our fiscal and economic futures--to move forward with
a bold plan to reduce the deficit.
Mr. Chairman, you are no stranger to putting forward bold plans.
Although I could not support the specific policies in the plan you put
forward for the FY2012 budget, I applaud your courage for offering a
plan addressing politically untouchable issues into the public record.
With elections a mere eight months away, our window to take the action
necessary to pass a responsible alternative to sequestration is closing
quickly. We need to take the opportunity to put forward another bold
but bipartisan plan to address our fiscal imbalances.
The principles I support are simple, responsible spending caps,
reforms to strengthen and sustain entitlement programs, and tax
policies that supports both adequate federal revenues and a growing
economy. A budget resolution cannot put all of this in place, but it
can provide the framework for laws which can achieve those goals.
If we do our job correctly, we can reduce the deficit responsibly
while still fulfilling the obligations of the federal government to
provide for the general welfare and common defense. Avoiding
sequestration will allow us to invest in infrastructure and our local
communities.
We need a highway bill and to have a highway bill we need a budget
capable of accommodating one. Transportation infrastructure creates and
sustains jobs and bolsters economic activity. I have a community in
Woodburn, Oregon which has been waiting a generation for the federal
government to step up and come through on the promise to maintain an
efficient Interstate Highway system. Woodburn is a community ripe for
development. They have saved millions of their own money to contribute
to the federal project needed to improve the I-5 Woodburn Interchange.
Once the traffic jams along the interstate are cleared and trucks can
reach the freeway, hundreds of acres of ready land will open up to
industrial development.
Our communities also need us to prioritize so they can rely on our
continued support. The Secure Rural Schools and Self-Determination Act
(SRS) is the lifeblood for many counties across Oregon which once
relied on timber harvests off federal lands. Until we implement a
sustainable and scientifically defensible plan for our federal forests
that generates revenue for our counties this program must be
reauthorized. Without these funds many rural communities will
effectively dissolve as schools, law enforcement, public safety, and
transportation infrastructure crumble.
Our communities need us to set our priorities straight. Our
children need us to provide for their futures. Our parents need us to
ensure the solvency of their retirement and healthcare. We can do all
of this or none of this, it depends on the priorities we set.
Please, go big.
Thank you for your consideration.
[The prepared statement of Timothy J. Walz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Timothy J. Walz, a Representative in
Congress From the State of Minnesota
Chairman Ryan, Ranking Member Van Hollen, Thank you for the
opportunity to testify here today. I appreciate the very important work
that you do and I am honored to be able to contribute to that work in a
small way.
In my view, there are two very important areas that need to be
addressed in regards to the budget that are interrelated--tackling our
national debt, and investing in a 21st century economy.
First, one of my most important responsibilities as a Member of
Congress is to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being spent in a wise
and efficient manner.
And I'm proud to say that, since taking office in 2007, I've made
it my mission to take a proactive approach towards doing so.
I have returned over $300,000 in taxpayer funds from my
office budget to the U.S. Treasury with the intention of paying down
the national debt and I am one of the only Members of Congress to
return every salary increase I've ever received.
Although I make these good faith efforts to reduce our
debt, I know that they alone are not enough.
Tackling our national debt will require us to make some tough
choices. And I remain committed to working with my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle to do so.
Last year, we took a major step in this process by enacting more
than $2 trillion dollars in spending cuts--but even this will not be
enough to tackle the problem at hand
That is why last year, I joined with 100 Republicans and Democrats
in calling on Congress to go big and pass a package that reduces the
debt by fully $4 trillion
In order to get to that total, we will have to make significant
cuts to programs that are unnecessary or ineffective
But securing America's long-term fiscal security and maintaining
our leadership role in the world economy also requires us to invest in
the kinds of things that have always been the bedrock of America's
international competitiveness:
Educating the world's most productive workforce
Building the world's most highly-developed infrastructure
Taking the lead in the technologies of the future
As parent and a teacher, I may be biased in how important I believe
education is to our country.
I hear so often from business owners and managers in southern
Minnesota about how the lack of sufficiently qualified workers is
holding them back
That is why we need to continue to invest in America's schools,
from pre-k up through community colleges and technical schools, to
ensure that our workforce has the skills to meet employer demand
At the same time, southern Minnesota's businesses can't compete in
the world economy if they can't get their goods to market
As a member of the House Transportation Committee, I recognize the
importance of taking a visionary approach to infrastructure investment.
This country became what we are today because of the innovative
vision our forefathers took towards infrastructure:
They built the railroads that connected the continent and
spurred the industrial revolution;
They built the interstate highway system that made our
American economy the greatest the world has ever known.
But today, it seems as though we have lost that vision
At a time when our competitors overseas are investing in smarter
roads and faster trains, our infrastructure is crumbling
There are approximately 150,000 American bridges that have
been deemed ``structurally deficient'' or ``functionally obsolete'' by
the Federal Highway Administration.
Nearly 1,500 of those bridges are in my home state of
Minnesota.
This is unacceptable. We need to make a commitment to restoring and
modernizing our infrastructure for the next century.
We can do this by taking the same visionary approach that our
forefathers took.
In doing so we will:
Put hundreds of thousands of Americans to work all across
the country;
Give folks peace of mind by repairing our deficient roads
and bridges so their daily commute is safer; and
Create a 21st century infrastructure, including investment
in high-speed rail that will allow our businesses and communities to
grow and prosper.
Now is not the time to under-invest in our crumbling
infrastructure. Now is not the time to compromise on safety. And now is
not the time to let America fall behind the rest of the world.
This situation calls for leadership and a vision for the future.
Both the Chamber of Commerce and the labor community agree; investment
in infrastructure will create jobs and grow our economy immediately.
Finally, I believe that our budget should help America's inventors,
entrepreneurs and manufacturers lead the world on the clean energy
technologies of the 21st century
Just as past support for research, development and implementation
helped American businesses take the lead in the transportation,
communications, and energy technologies of the last century
So too should we pursue a policy that helps American businesses
lead the world in the wind, solar, and other renewable energy
technologies of the next century
This is a smart investment not only in American jobs and
competitiveness
It will also help America achieve our goal of energy independence
using the natural resources and ingenuity that are found in southern
Minnesota and across the country
Let us not settle for the small.
Let's work together in bipartisan fashion and make a commitment to
our nation's future.
Let's make a robust investment in our nation's infrastructure that
will create All-American jobs, repair our roads and bridges, and help
our communities prosper.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify here today and thank
you again for the work you are doing on behalf of our country.
[Whereupon, at 2:34 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]