Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 43 (Thursday, April 6, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 43 (Thursday, April 6, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H1671-H1674]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is recognized
for half the time remaining before midnight.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is an honor to come
before the House once again. And once again, the 30-something Working
Group comes to the floor to share with the American people and to
report what is happening here under the Capitol dome.
We look forward to continuing to do this in the future. We know we
are going to be off for 2 weeks for the Easter break; all of next week,
all of the week after, and we come back at the end of the month to try
to do the business of the people of the United States of America.
I think it is important for us to understand what took place here,
Mr. Speaker, in the Capitol just today. As you know, we have been
working throughout the week and sharing with not only the American
people but also with the Members of Congress the importance of what we
do here under the Capitol dome. When I say under the Capitol dome, I am
talking about the legislating that is supposed to be taking place on
behalf of the American people.
I think it is important for us to not lose or miss the occurrence
that did not take place here tonight or tomorrow. We were supposed to
be in session tomorrow. We were supposed to vote on the budget that
many Members on the majority side and the Republican side, Mr. Speaker,
said was a good budget; that it is fiscally sound and we know what we
are doing.
Well, we debated all day here on this floor. I was here a little
earlier today, Mr. Speaker, maybe some 13 hours ago on this floor when
we opened this Chamber at 10 a.m. this morning. And I pulled my chart
out to talk about the borrowing that this Republican majority has done
with the President of the United States, record-breaking borrowing from
foreign nations and selling off the United States of America where
foreign countries own our debt. And all day today I saw Members after
that on the Republican side saying we are proud of this budget, this
budget is going to put America back on track.
On this side, the Democratic side, we were talking about fiscal
responsibility, we were talking about being reasonable with our
spending and also making sure that we prioritize every day working
Americans and not just the special interests and the super wealthy. I
think that argument prevailed. Because I understood at the end of the
day that there weren't enough Members on the majority side to pass
President Bush's budget, because that is what it is.
This House has been just saying, yes, Mr. President, whatever you
want. No matter what the Constitution says, no matter what our
responsibility is to our constituents, we are going to do it the way
you say you want it done.

{time} 2300

That is what has gotten this House in a bad light with the American
people.
Now, I am here tonight and the 30-something Working Group is here
tonight to make sure that the American people and the Members of the
majority side understand, we were united in voting for our budget which
is a pay-as-you-go budget and that will balance the budget in 6 years.
We were united. When I say ``we,'' House Democrats are united. If they
were from the west coast or South Or North, whichever way you cut it,
you can go all of the way to Hawaii, House Democrats were united in
bringing America back into a fiscal responsibility era when we balanced
the budget. We are the only party in this House that can say, We
balanced the budget.
Now, I used to play football for Florida A&M, and it was kind of hard
for the coach to talk about the national championship if the coach has
never been to the national championship or played in the national
championship game. Might have read about it, but it is hard for someone
to tell you how it feels if you have never been there.
We have been there on the Democratic side. We have balanced the
budget. We come to this floor to say if you are going to spend, then
you better show where the money is coming from and how you are going to
replace it. You just cannot say I am going to take the credit card out
and I am going to put it on the backs of Americans, and I am going to
come to the floor, and I am talking about, say for instance,
hypothetically if I was on the majority side being a Republican, and it
bothers me just saying it because the Republican majority has made
history in all of the wrong places and for all of the wrong reasons
over the past years of borrowing and spending. Borrowing and spending.
Borrowing from whom? Let me just take my little map out here.
The Republican majority and President Bush, $1.05 trillion that
foreign nations own that did not exist prior to this Republican
majority having the opportunity to have their way along with following
the President and bad policy. Japan, they own a part of the American
pie. Did the American people do that? No. Did the Democrats do that?
No. Remember, the Republican majority did it with the President of the
United States. $682.8 billion is what Japan owns of U.S. debt. That is
not my doing. That is the President and the Republican majority.
Red China, and we have major, major problems with China. I am talking
about China as it relates to Red China, Communist China. We have a
number of our jobs, we have U.S. workers training to do their job in
China. Ninety

[[Page H1672]]

percent of the engineers will no longer be in the United States of
America; they will be in China. They will be in Asia. They will be in
other countries and so we have folks that are attending school now,
those that can afford to, and I will get to that in a minute, those
that can still afford to go to school, without the help of the Federal
Government because the Republican majority would like to cut that in
the budget also. They would like to attend school, but that is
something that the Democratic Congress in the next Congress will
hopefully be able to provide for them. China owns $248.8 billion of the
American apple pie.
The United Kingdom owns $223.2 billion. They are buying our debt. If
I was a Republican, it would be hard for me to go back home and share
that I am a fiscal conservative. Just because you say you are, does not
necessarily mean you are. These are the facts. Caribbean nations, all
of them put together, $115.3 billion in foreign debt that they own of
the United States because of the Republican majority and the
President's policies.
Taiwan, $71.3 billion.
OPEC nations, we have a lot of problems with OPEC nations, and not
only are we paying through the nose at the pump, countries like Iran
that own a part of the American apple pie as it relates to foreign
debt, $67.8 billion.
Germany. Germany, that means something to some of our veterans, $68.7
billion of our debt.
Korea, $66.5 billion of our debt. Once again, to our veterans, that
means something.
Canada, just north of us, $53.8 billion of our debt.
I say to the majority Members, they do not want to lead on the
Republican side of the aisle and they do not want to work in a
bipartisan way and pick up the Democratic policies as it relates to
governing in a way where everyone can participate and be a part of the
United States of America, then they can join us because I believe the
American people may very well see fit, not just Democrats and not just
Independent, but there are some Republicans out there saying, what
happened? What happened to the folks that lined up out here on the
steps, Mr. Speaker, and said with this Contract on America, or for
America or whatever it was called, that we were going to balance the
budget and be fiscally sound and we were not going to be spenders? The
biggest spenders in this Chamber are the Republican majority. If you
want to clear that up, you can vote for a Democratic Congress.
I am glad to be joined by the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman
Schultz). I was just going down the line, and I will also share with
the Speaker and other Members the fact that we were supposed to vote on
the budget if not tonight, tomorrow. It was pulled. Some may go home
and say, and I want to make sure that there is not one American
confused on why we did not vote for the budget. Somebody may say, The
Democrats stopped us from voting for the budget. No, the Democrats
pointed out what was in President Bush's budget, and the Republicans
said, as they have been doing for the last 6, 7 years that the
President has been in office, Oh, Mr. President, we are right with you.
We do not have a process. You send it to us and we will rubber-stamp it
and send it on out. Foreign countries may own our debt. We may go into
deficits. Student loans may be cut. We can train the next generation to
make us the leaders of the free world and continue to keep us in front.
That is fine, Mr. President, whatever you send, we will do.
The bottom line is that the pressure was too great, and we were the
ones that called out what was wrong.
I think some Members on the majority side felt a little bit
uncomfortable going home for a couple of weeks sharing, and a big holy
week coming up, some folks might have leaned over and said, Mr.
Congressman, Madam Congresswoman, why do I have to pay more for my
child's education? Why do we pay more for debt than we invest in
education and homeland security?

I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You asked why we were unable to vote on the
budget. It is simple. Finally, finally, it obviously became clear to
many of our Republican colleagues because we were all unified on the
Democratic side, there was not going to be a single Democratic vote for
this budget because we are not going to put a vote up for increasing
the deficit or maintaining the deficit or increasing our national debt.
We are not going to put a vote up on that board that makes drastic cuts
in education or cuts in veterans health care. We are not going to put a
vote up on that board that fails to protect the environment.
This Republican budget would have done all of those things. I have
been here 15 months. I am a freshmen. This is my first year. I just
completed my first year in Congress, and finally someone found a
conscience on the other side of the aisle. Finally, it was not that
they just put that bill out there and you saw enough arms being twisted
and the board being held open long enough so they could wrench the
votes that they needed.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, it was not ``finally'';
it was because the American people were saying, what's wrong with you
guys? What is going on? I did not elect you all to go up there and
represent the super-wealthy, and I didn't elect you all to make
specials deals with special interests. I did not elect you to be
fiscally irresponsible. They are reading the same papers. Somebody give
me a newspaper. I just need a newspaper. They are reading the same
newspapers and watching the same news and getting the same phone calls
we are getting in our office about, are you all still with us? Are you
with us or are you with them?
I need to get my Newt Gingrich quote up here because I just want to
make sure that folks do not get confused. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I want
to make sure that we tell it the way it is because I believe the
American people and some Members are getting what we are sharing with
them. You have the Gingrich quote. I think it is important that we
continue to share this information.
When we talk about third-party validators, this is not just something
that we talk about over lunch and say that sounds good. No, this is
from government offices and former Members of this Chamber and generals
that are out there that are retired and some are still serving.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Let's just look at the record here. What we
are talking about and what our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle would have been faced with is going home for the next 2 weeks and
looking their constituents in the eye and having to tell them if this
budget had gone forward and they had supported it, that they would be
supportive of the five largest deficits in history. The top-ranking
deficit in history was in 2004 when we had a $412 billion deficit.
Number two was in 2003 when we had a $378 billion deficit.
Number three was 2006, the current year, when we had a $372 billion
deficit.
The fourth largest year is 2007, still a $348 billion deficit.
And the fifth largest deficit, 2005, the year that just ended, with a
$318 billion deficit.
Now these numbers jump all over the board, but if you go in order,
the deficit is going in the wrong direction. 2006 is when you had the
third highest deficit in history.
If, like the President said he was committed and his Republican
leadership was committed to cutting the deficit in half, I don't know.
It does not appear like it does. Is 318 half of 412? Are any of these
numbers half of any other number here? I am not very good at math, but
not the math I am familiar with.
Now let us look at the debt limit because we have also been careening
every year towards the debt ceiling. You have held up letter after
letter after letter from Secretary Snow, the Secretary of the Treasury
who begs us, who was begging us recently to please increase the debt
limit so the United States of America does not default on its loans,
the loans that you were just outlining that cover the country. Can you
pull those up?
Mr. MEEK of Florida. This was letter one, December 29th of 2005, the
Secretary came into the office days before the New Year and said please
raise the debt limit because we are about to run out of money.
February 16, he got a little nervous and said, Listen, the Federal
retirement program, we are not going to be able to make the payments.
This went to Mr. Spratt, our ranking member.

[[Page H1673]]

Again on the 6th of March, 2006, it is almost like we are having
problems and we may not be able to pay the light bill, in so many
words. Those were written by Secretary Snow, appointed by the President
and confirmed by the Senate.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Lest people think that the increases we are
talking about are small and insignificant, let's go through the kind of
numbers that we are talking about and the increases we are referring
to.
The Republicans have increased the debt limit by $3 trillion since
2002. That is since 2002. This is 2006. In 2002 they increased it by
$450 billion. In 2003, May of 2003, by another $984 billion.
In November of 2004, the month I was elected, another $800 billion.

{time} 2315

Now, where is the planning? I mean, what is going on? They are
spending like drunken sailors. That is what is going. They have no
self-control.
Let's go to March 2006, which was just last month. $781 billion. And
you know it would be nice if we could have some transparency and some
clarity and honesty in this Chamber, which would mean that we would
have had a straight up or down vote on the debt limit. But this last
time it was tucked into legislation. I bet you most Members, I can
assure you, most Members had no idea that the increase in the debt
limit was in there.
They do everything, the Republican leadership does everything
possible to avoid us taking a straight up or down vote because, oh, my
God, I mean, if they have to go home and face the families that they
represent, who every day are struggling, Mr. Ryan, to make ends meet
and not run up debt on their credit cards, and not spend more than they
take in, well, it is a little tough to face your constituents when you
don't do that with their money.
There is no regard here for the use of the American taxpayers dollars
because it apparently doesn't matter to the Republican leadership here
that we are spending more than we have. Clearly, it is baffling. It
really is. And this is the party, supposedly, at least in name only, of
fiscal responsibility, of smaller government, of reducing spending.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I will be happy to yield.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think that we are starting to see, every single
day in the news, and we don't need to bring up all the different
topics, but every single day over the course of the last couple of
years, we have seen the dismantling of the credibility of the
Republican majority.
The party that came in saying they were going to balance the budget,
gone. The party that came in and said they were in charge of real
security in the United States, gone. Smuggling in nuclear material. The
party that said that they were going to get the economy up and moving
hasn't happened. All of the promises pre-war, none have happened. None.
The party that said America first, well, Mr. Meek, you have the
beautiful poster, beautiful in the sense that it illustrates the point
of where this Republican Congress is borrowing their money from. That
is not America first. That is not taking care of home. I mean, we have
got to get back to the basics.
And so every single day this Republican majority and this President
are getting dismantled day by day by day in news accounts from people
who work, underlings who have diminished the credibility of this
administration. They have Republican generals coming out talking about
how this has been such a foolhardy effort, and how the execution of the
war has been an atrocity, how Katrina just fell apart right before the
country's eyes on all of the cable news channels and on the network
news channels.
And now, my friend, we have the father of the Republican revolution.
I yield to my friend to talk about that because this it is one thing
for Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Tim Ryan from Ohio, Mr. Meek from Florida,
it is one thing for us to be critical. It is not just us. I yield to my
friend.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, what I am going is do is just pepper in,
Mr. Speaker, the difference from what the Republican majority is
proposing and ran out of town without voting on because it is a budget
of shame versus what we have put forth as our budgets. And then Ms.
Wasserman Schultz is going to share with us what the former Speaker,
the first Republican Speaker in a number of years, when the Republicans
took over the House, what he has to say about the Republican majority.
But let me just, once again, you know, more of the same versus
change. Okay? And the bottom line is, is this budget that we were
supposed to vote on, either tomorrow or today, you let the majority
tell it, is it fiscally responsible?
Number 1, we have a chart, and this chart, Mr. Speaker, for the
majority Members and also for the American people, will be on
housedemocrats.gov website starting tomorrow. Is it fiscally
responsible? No. The GOP budget calls for deficits as far as the eye
can see. Never achieving balance, a balanced budget, adding another
$2.3 trillion to the national debt over the next 5 years.
Democratic budget, yes. Fiscally responsible. The deficit is lower
than the GOP budget over the next 5 years and gets to a balanced
budget, balanced budget, Mr. Speaker, in 6 years basically using pay-
as-you-go rules which require that spending increases and tax cuts be
paid for, and which brought us into a budget surplus in the 1990s. That
is fact. That is not fiction.
I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. And when you are dealing with the facts
staring you in the face like that, then even their former leader, the
chief architect of what was then called the Republican revolution that
began in 1994 and the run up to the 1994 election, when he begins to
use ``us'' and ``they'' terminology, then you know they have really
made some serious mistakes. They, the Republican leadership here has
really made some serious mistakes.
And let's just go through what former Speaker Gingrich has said about
what they are doing. He cited a series of blunders. Our third party
validator for this evening is the Knight Ridder news papers. And
Speaker Gingrich was quoted in their papers on Friday, March 31, 2006.
He cited a series of blunders under Republican rule, from failures in
the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to mismanagement of the war in Iraq.
He said, the government has squandered billions of dollars in Iraq.
But that is not all he said. He also noted that a congressional
watchdog agency, and I will note that I can recall watching Speaker
Gingrich on the House floor a number of times, and when he was in the
minority, would cite the congressional watchdog either when the facts
helped him, and then when he was in the majority, disparaging what the
congressional watchdog that he was referring to said, depending on
which side he felt like taking.
But in this case he noted that a congressional watchdog agency
recently smuggled a truck carrying nuclear material in the country to
test security. He said, why isn't the President pounding on the table?
Why isn't he sending up 16 reform bills?
And that is the lack of outrage that we have talked about here on the
House floor in the 30-something Working Group. Where is the outrage? I
mean, if we have nuclear material being smuggled into this country, and
no one knows it, where is their outrage? Where is the oversight? Where
is the committee hearing?
Another thing he said, here is where he calls them ``they''. In the
same article, he says, they are seen by the country as being in charge
of a government that can't function.
Now, if the architect of the Republican revolution is calling the
Republican leadership and the rank and file here ``they'', then I think
it is clear that it is time for a change. It is time that we restore
the PAYGO rules. It is time that we restore some fiscal responsibility.
It is time that we make sure that actions match words. The American
people, in each of their families, they struggle to spend only what
they have.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Can I make a point?
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The point I want to make is one that we have made
many, many times here, is that this outfit, on the other side of the
aisle,

[[Page H1674]]

has for the last 14 or 16 years run down government. The only problem
in society is government.
And so, when it comes to Katrina or comes to a war and you actually
need government or education, you actually need government to work on
behalf of the American people, all of a sudden it doesn't work. And it
doesn't work because you have disrespected it for the last 14 or 16
years. You have appointed people to positions that are not qualified to
actually run it.
And I think what we see here, with the Defense Department and
Secretary Rumsfeld and the Pentagon and the way they have executed the
war has been atrocious. Katrina, you have people who are not qualified
to run the emergency management system in the country. And you get the
kind of results that you have talked about. You get what you think
about it. If you have a good attitude about things, good things will
happen. Run it down, you get crap. And that is basically what has
happened.
I yield to my friend.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We have been talking about the pay-as-you-go
needs that we have here. Because we are the 30-something Working Group,
what we try to do really often is explain the multi generational impact
that these fiscal policies and decisions have.
Let's take a look at the economic impact on college students, Mr.
Meek. We are talking about, in this chart, you have the average tuition
and fees, which is this line here that has gone up and up and up. Yet,
the Pell Grant average award has remained completely flat. The maximum
award has also remained completely flat and doesn't even come anywhere
close to meeting the needs that the students who are trying to attend
college and who are struggling to get a higher education need the two
to coincide. There is an impact seniors, an impact on college students.
I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Well, I just want to say what we are spending our
money on, instead of spending it on the Pell Grants, this is what we
are spending it on, just the interest on the debt that we have been
talking about, and this is what we are spending on education.
We have got to balance the budget, implement these PAYGO rules that
say that you are not going to spend any money in this government unless
you know how to pay for it. And you are not going to go out and borrow
it. We tried to do it with H. Con. Res. 95, couldn't do it. Zero
Republicans voted to put PAYGO rules on to reign in spending. We tried
it again with roll call vote Number 91 on March 25 of 2004. Dennis
Miller tried to do it in Kansas. Charlie Stenholm tried to do it.
Democrats have tried to reign in spending here in the United States
Congress by putting these PAYGO rules in, Mr. Meek, by putting these
rules in. And no Republican, ladies and gentlemen, we had a huge vote
today and the Republicans kept talking about we are reigning in
spending. Baloney. We have tried to put these restraints on time and
time again and no Republican, not one, tried to implement these rules.
I yield to my friend from Florida.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. I would appreciate, Mr. Ryan, while you are at
it, if you give the website out to the Members.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. www.housedemocrates.gov/30something. All of the
charts that folks see here tonight, Mr. Speaker, can be accessed on
this website. www.housedemocrats.gov/30something.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Ryan, and thank you Ms. Wasserman
Schultz. And Mr. Speaker, basically what we are talking about is
change. We are giving the American people an alternative to where we
are headed now, which is down a dark tunnel, and it very well can be a
train versus the sunlight. And we believe the numbers that we showed
here today, we want to make sure that everyone knows that all of these
charts will be on the website, housedemocrats.gov. You can get that
information. And we would like to thank the democratic leadership for
allowing us to have this hour.

____________________