[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 28, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H4891-H4897]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  CONFERENCE REPORT ON S. CON. RES. 13, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE 
                      BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 371, I call 
up the conference report to accompany the Senate concurrent resolution 
(S. Con. Res. 13) setting forth the congressional budget for the United 
States Government for fiscal year 2010, revising the appropriate 
budgetary levels for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth the 
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2011 through 2014, and 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 371, the 
conference report is considered read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
April 27, 2009, at page H4774.)

[[Page H4892]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan) 
each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  In resolving the conference this year, we have had a hard hand to 
play. In the backwash of the Bush administration, we have had to 
struggle with an economy that is reeling, if not receding. The deficit 
is deep and the end is nowhere in sight.
  President Obama has responded to these challenges head-on, and we 
have followed his lead with a conference agreement that reflects most 
of his policies and most of his proposals.
  The President has recognized that we have not one but two deficits. 
The first is an economy running at about 7 percent below its full 
employment level, or $1 trillion below its potential. To move our 
economy closer to its capacity, the President signed into law a package 
of stimulus measures totaling $787 billion in tax cuts and spending 
increases.
  Here is what the Congressional Budget Office says in its analysis of 
the President's budget: ``The adoption of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act and very aggressive actions by the Fed and the 
Treasury will help end the recession this fall.''
  Let's hope CBO is right, because it's all but impossible to balance 
the budget when the economy is in recession. Nevertheless, this year's 
deficit constitutes 12.3 percent of our gross domestic product. At 
least two-thirds of that stems from the tax and spending policies 
undertaken by the Bush administration. Much of the enormous swell in 
this year's deficit is due to some extraordinary expenditures, such as 
the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and the consolidation of Freddie Mac 
and Fannie Mae in the Federal budget, and the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act. The good news is these expenditures are nonrecurring 
so long as the economy recovers.
  The President sent us a budget that will cut the deficit by two-
thirds by 2013, from $1.752 trillion this year to $523 billion in 2014. 
$523 billion is roughly 3 percent of GDP in 2014, and in that sense, it 
is sustainable, because that's roughly the growth rate in 2014.
  The budget embodied in our resolution uses CBO projections, which are 
less optimistic. Yet it reduces the deficit to $523 billion in 2014, 
which is 3 percent of GDP, a bit less than the rate of growth in the 
economy for that year.
  Our budget can rightly be called a deficit reduction budget, because 
it lowers the deficit by $1.2 trillion over 5 years. On the other hand, 
our budget is not so committed to deficit reduction that it overrides 
or overlooks other needs. In fact, it takes on topics that previous 
budgets have found too tough to face, such as health care for millions 
of Americans who do not have insurance. On top of that it slows down 
defense spending with an increase of 4 percent and makes a moderate 
adjustment to non-defense discretionary spending, taking it a bit above 
this year.
  In spite of deficits, the President's budget and our conference 
report launch some bold initiatives to make our economy more productive 
and our people more productive. First, in higher education, with an 
increase in Pell Grants to $5,550; next in health care for the 
millions, 46 million by one estimate, who are uninsured; and, finally, 
in alternative energies to lessen our dependence on foreign oil and the 
depletion of our environment.
  As the Budget Committee, we do not make tax policies or write tax 
bills, but we do set revenue levels with certain assumptions in mind. 
We have provided revenues sufficient to renew the middle-income tax 
cuts adopted in 2001 and 2003. These include the 10 percent bracket, 
the child tax credit and the marital penalty relief bill. We have also 
assumed revenue levels that allow for the AMT to be patched for 3 years 
to keep it from burdening middle-income taxpayers for whom it was never 
intended. We have also assumed in our revenue estimates that the estate 
tax will be extended at the 2009 levels, leaving exemptions of $3.5 
million per decedent in place, in force, in law.
  Our Republican colleagues nevertheless complained about our tax 
policies. Let me read from CBO's nonpartisan analysis of the 
President's budget, which is very much like our budget: ``Proposed 
changes in tax policy would reduce revenues by an estimated $1.7 
trillion over the next 10 years.'' That's the CBO talking.
  The President's major initiatives--health care, energy, education, 
environment--are all implemented by way of reserve funds, and, let me 
stress, these reserve funds are all deficit-neutral. They are yet to be 
funded, and they only become operative to the extent that they are 
actually funded.
  The resolution before us sounds all of these themes, and with a few 
exceptions, supports the principles underlying the President's budget.
  Our resolution is laid out in the form of a 5-year budget using CBO's 
stricter scoring and CBO's projections of the economy.

                              {time}  1845

  OMB has run out its budget over 10 years, but a 5-year budget is not 
at all unusual.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SPRATT. I yield myself 1 additional minute.
  It's the customary time frame for budgeting, and we think that the 5-
year budget is particularly appropriate in a year when no one can 
adequately foresee the future or can even foresee a few years over the 
horizon.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, this is a big moment. This is a moment where Congress 
is now about to decide the passage of the final conference report of 
this year's budget. It's the budget of our new President with this new 
Democratic majority. It's a budget that encapsulates their values, the 
issues that the majority party ran on, the issues that the majority 
party did say in their campaigns that they were going to pass.
  I did 25 listening sessions in the First Congressional District over 
the Easter recess, and a lot of constituents were concerned and 
complained about all of this new government and about all of this 
spending as if it's something they didn't see coming, to which I 
answered to most of my constituents: You know what? The President did 
run on these ideas. The Democrats who took the majority did run on 
these ideas. These are the things they said that they would do, and now 
this budget shows that they're doing it.
  So honesty and candor are being had with this budget. The description 
of what it does, however, I would say, is not being candidly handled. 
It is not being done honestly. If you take a look at an honest 
accounting of this budget that is now before the floor, there is an 
additional $1.172 trillion in deficit spending that's occurring here 
that had been masked away from it.
  You've seen the kinds of quotes from some who would describe the 
enormous vision of this budget as one that will bring a new day in 
America, where we will look more like a European kind of an economy, 
like more of a European type of social welfare state. I know a lot of 
people don't like that description, and in some ways, that description 
that this converts the American Government into a European welfare 
state government is not a fair description.
  The reason that that's not a fair description is it's not fair to 
Europe. Under the Maastricht treaty, under which the Europeans allow 
entrance, this budget would be in violation of it. If you take an 
honest accounting of this budget, then the deficit never falls below 5 
percent of the GDP. We couldn't be allowed into the European Union if 
this budget passes, which we know the majority has the votes, and it 
will pass.
  This budget doubles the national debt held by the public in about 
5\1/2\ years, and it triples it in about 10\1/2\ years. This budget 
recreates a whole new system, a whole new precedence. This new 
precedence changes the whole notion of budgets, the whole concept of 
what we refer to as the 1974 Budget Act. That budget act was an idea 
that we've got to get spending under control, that we've got to get our 
fiscal house in order, that we've got to get the deficit down.

[[Page H4893]]

  We've got to work on our borrowing. We need to bring fiscal 
discipline and some limits and some control to the process of taxing 
and spending in Congress. This doesn't do that. This takes a whole new 
precedence, and it uses the budget. It perverts the tools within the 
budget, not to lower the level of spending, not to lower the level of 
taxing, not to work on reducing the national debt. It uses the budget 
to increase these things--to engage in an absolute gusher of new 
spending, of more taxing and of more borrowing.
  In fact, the order occurs like this: a huge gusher of new spending, 
chased by ever-higher taxes which never actually catch up with that 
spending, which results in a record level of new borrowing. More debt 
will accumulate under this coming Presidency than under all prior 
Presidencies combined. That's the budget that we have here before us 
today.
  The chairman talked about the Congressional Budget Office saying 
taxes are being cut in this budget. That's really an interesting 
statement. You have to go through so much mental gymnastics to actually 
rationalize that statement. What this budget does, to be fair, is it 
takes some current tax rates and keeps them current--the Child Tax 
Credit, the Marriage Penalty Relief, some of the lower income tax 
brackets. So it doesn't cut those taxes. It just keeps them where they 
are.
  Under this budget, the alternative minimum tax kicks in in full force 
in 3 years, hitting at that time about 30 million families with an 
average of $2,000 of more taxes.
  It raises the tax rates on income that most small businesses pay, so 
they'll pay a tax rate higher than that of the largest corporations. It 
raises the tax rates on the very investments, capital gains and 
dividends that make up our pension funds, our 401(k) plans, our college 
savings plans that are now down by 40 percent. So it has not only the 
largest tax increase in American history and not only the largest 
spending increase in American history but the largest debt increase 
ever. That's not budgeting. That's irresponsibility.
  So we, obviously, have a difference of opinion with this budget. 
While we criticize this, we brought to the floor our own budget to say 
how we would do things differently, and we've got to get our taxes low 
to grow this economy. We've got to control spending so that we can have 
government live within its means so that we can get our debt paid off.
  At the end of the day, the question is whether or not we're going to 
do good in this generation by the next generation, whether or not we're 
going to take on the fiscal challenges that are confronting this 
country and this generation today so that future generations of 
Americans can continue to enjoy the high standards of living that we 
have enjoyed, whether Americans can still test the boundaries of 
prosperity and society or whether we're going to go down that sliding 
scale, that slippery slope of giving the next generation an inferior 
standard of living.
  It is a quantifiable, irrefutable fact that this budget puts us on 
that glide path to giving the next generation an inferior standard of 
living, an ocean of debt, a sea of higher taxes and spending as far as 
the eye can see. This budget should not pass. Unfortunately, this 
budget will pass.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
  (Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the 2010 budget resolution 
conference report, and I commend the chairman for his diligent work, as 
well as the other conferees, to produce a budget to grow our economy 
and to restore discipline, finally, to America's accounts.
  The key to our Nation's future is a strong, robust economy, and this 
budget leads us in that direction. It also meets our commitments to our 
veterans by including a substantial increase from the 2009 veterans' 
services.
  I ask my colleagues to support this resolution. Again, I thank the 
very able Budget chairman, Congressman Spratt of South Carolina, for 
his incredible work.
  I rise today in support of the 2010 Budget Resolution Conference 
Report. I wish to applaud Chairmam Spratt and the other conferees for 
their diligent work on behalf of our nation.
  The key to our nation's future is a a strong, robust economy built on 
the foundation of resilient citizens working hard to produce goods and 
services. The Budget Resolution supports revitalization of our economy 
through investing in education and energy independence, both of which 
keep us competitive globally while protecting our national interests.
  In addition, this Budget Resolution aims to cut the deficit by nearly 
two-thirds while maintaining our commitment to our nation's veterans by 
including an 11.7 percent increase from 2009 for veteran's services. 
This is critical as we address our aging veterans and those who 
struggle with PTSD and other war-related injuries.
  I ask my colleagues to support this resolution.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. George Miller).
  (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker and Members of the 
House, I rise in strong support today of this conference report for the 
fiscal year 2010 budget resolution.
  I want to commend Chairman Spratt and the members of the committee 
for bringing us a budget which will put America on a path toward fiscal 
health and a competitive future by investing in our key priorities of 
education, health care and energy.
  This budget resolution will put us on a track to a stronger, fairer 
21st century economy that can benefit all Americans. It will help us 
rebuild our middle class and turn our looming crises--energy, health 
care and education--into opportunities for prosperity, and it will 
create a new era of accountability, honesty and transparency for 
taxpayers.
  This budget will allow us to make dramatic changes in two areas that 
could not be more critical to working families and our economy's 
recovery, and that is expanding access to affordable health care and 
coverage and leveraging a more competitive workforce by making college 
more affordable. For too long, our broken health care system has 
threatened both our fiscal and our medical health. Millions of 
Americans currently lack health care coverage, a figure that is growing 
daily as more workers lose their jobs and, therefore, their health care 
benefits. Millions of Americans who do not have coverage too often have 
to choose between quality and affordability, any health care at all or 
bankruptcy.
  This conference report will also give us the opportunity to give much 
needed relief to families who are finding it harder and harder to pay 
for college while losing jobs and income. Some families have done 
everything right--saving, working hard, giving their children a good 
education--only to find out that their plans have changed by the 
economic downturn.
  In this legislation, because of the reconciliation instructions, we 
will be able to take and recycle the money that now goes to banks for 
fees and commissions to the student loan program, and we will be able 
to use that to improve and to increase the Pell Grant scholarship 
program so that we'll be able to make sure that that keeps track with 
the cost of education. For those young people who are in the most 
financial need and who are fully qualified to go to college, we will be 
sure that they will be able to do that. That's all because of this 
budget resolution put together by this committee, and we should support 
this conference report.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, Madam Speaker, I would like to 
yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett).
  Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, tonight I rise in opposition to this budget, a budget 
that will hurt the American people. People who live in the real world, 
people who work for a living understand that you can't spend money that 
you don't have. These people don't need to hear from us about 
sacrifice. They sacrifice every day--the mother and father who 
sacrifice by cutting back at home to make sure their daughter has the 
school supplies that she needs, the business

[[Page H4894]]

owner who sacrifices to make sure that she can meet this month's 
payroll. They're making tough decisions and are living off bare bones 
budgets, but they look up here to Washington, and they see we're 
spending more money than we ever have.
  So it's no wonder that they're angry. It's no wonder that they're fed 
up with wasteful spending. They should be mad. They know it and so do 
we.
  This budget taxes too much, borrows too much and spends too much. 
This budget is just another example of how Democrats fail to understand 
the commonsense values that Americans use every day. The worst thing 
you can do in a recession is raise taxes. John F. Kennedy knew it and 
Ronald Reagan knew it. Apparently, the current President doesn't get it 
because raising taxes is exactly what President Obama's budget does to 
the tune of well over $1.5 trillion, much of which will be placed 
squarely on the shoulders of my State's number 1 job creator--the small 
businessperson.
  The truth is that, despite all the claims to the contrary, this 
budget won't create new jobs back home. It won't grow our economy. It 
will pass on debt to children because of bad decisions and bad debt. 
People back home deserve better, Madam Speaker. My children, as do 
yours, deserve better, Madam Speaker. I urge my colleagues to vote 
against this Democrat budget.
  Mr. SPRATT. Before yielding to Mr. Becerra of California, I would 
like simply to make two or three clarifications.
  You've heard it repeatedly said in this debate that this is a big 
spending bill, and it is, but it brings spending down from $3.9 
trillion outlays this year to $3.6 trillion outlays next year--a 
reduction in spending of $300 billion. As for revenues, we don't raise 
revenues. We cut revenues by $764 billion over 5 years and by $1.7 
trillion over 10 years. Those are the facts. That's the truth.
  I now recognize for 2 minutes the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Becerra).
  Mr. BECERRA. I thank the chairman for yielding, and I congratulate 
him on his work, once again, in putting forth a budget that America can 
be proud of.
  Madam Speaker, when President Barack Obama took office, he inherited 
a plane that was in a fast nosedive into the ground. He said we're 
going to pick up America and do the best we can. Many Americans have 
recognized that, but some haven't. I would like to give you the words 
of a couple of Americans who have recognized that. President Obama, in 
working with this Congress, is trying to make a difference.
  In the words of Commander Raymond Dempsey of the Disabled American 
Veterans, ``This is all good news for our Nation's veterans. The budget 
agreement signals that veterans are, indeed, a national priority'' or 
in the words of Mr. Robert Wallace, the executive director of the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, who says, ``On behalf of 
the 2.2 million men and women of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the 
United States and its auxiliaries, I would like to offer the VFW's 
strongest possible support for the conference agreement for the FY 2010 
budget. The VFW salutes your strong leadership in quickly coming to 
this agreement, especially one that makes so many meaningful and 
valuable improvements to the Department of Veterans Affairs. We 
strongly encourage all in Congress to follow your lead and adopt this 
conference report.''
  Is it a perfect budget? No, it's not. It's difficult to be perfect 
when you inherit a $1.3 trillion deficit and when the plane is going 
down into the ditch, but the President, in working with this Congress, 
is trying to make a difference. There are some people, including our 
veterans, who recognize that.
  For that reason, Madam Speaker, I hope that every single Member of 
this Congress recognizes that people who have given in many different 
ways recognize it's time to put our money where our mouth is and to 
vote for this budget.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis) from the Budget Committee.
  Mrs. LUMMIS. Madam Speaker, ever since I came here I've been hearing 
the majority party say that they inherited this deficit, and so they 
have no recourse except to double it in 5 years and then to triple it 
in 10. That is not a grown-up response to inheriting a deficit. The 
grown-up response is to be responsible with discretionary spending and 
taxes.

                              {time}  1900

  With regard to taxes, Madam Speaker, if the government increased the 
top tax rate from the current rate of 35 percent to 100 percent, it 
would only collect an extra $400 billion this year. In other words, 
confiscating all of the income that is currently taxed at 35 percent, 
the highest tax rate, would not raise enough revenue to cover any of 
the annual deficits projected in the next 10 years.
  There is no way the tax hikes on the rich alone can pay for the 
proposed spending in the current budget. The tax hikes are going to 
fall on working-class Americans and on poor Americans. This is no way 
to run a household, and Madam Speaker, it is no way to run this House.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, the question before the Congress and before the 
country is how do we get the economy to recover, how do we put people 
back to work and see their retirement savings grow again, their home 
equity rise again.
  One of the ways that needs to be done is to stop our addiction to 
imported foreign oil, and this budget takes an important step forward.
  It's important to understand what the budget does and does not do.
  What the budget does not do is make a judgment on the so-called cap-
and-trade proposals. At another time, on another piece of legislation, 
the House will debate and decide what to do about that. What the budget 
does, however, is to increase by about 10 percent our investment in 
ridding ourselves of that addiction to imported oil.
  What we say is building on the work in the economic recovery law, 
let's put Americans back to work building a smart grid that can take 
wind energy and other energy and spread it throughout our system. Let's 
put Americans to work building a hydrogen plant, solar farms, other 
forms of clean renewable energy and create green collar jobs. Let's 
retrofit existing buildings so they have a smaller carbon footprint and 
costs the owners and operators less to do.
  This budget represents the most significant investment in green 
technology and green jobs in the history of the country, and it does so 
because we recognize that an important part of the answer to the 
question of how to restore prosperity and create jobs for our 
constituents is to invest in clean energy and green collar jobs. So 
whether it is tax credits, loans, or other investments, this budget 
takes us a very long way towards that very laudable goal.
  A ``yes'' vote for this budget is a ``yes'' vote for a new strategy 
that will liberate us from the addiction of imported oil and grow jobs 
in our families and our communities.
  I would urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this budget 
conference report.
  Tomorrow, the President will have completed 100 days in office. The 
American people look back on these 100 days and what do they see from 
this Congress but a blizzard of spending. We've seen an over $1 
trillion stimulus package, an omnibus appropriations bill that we 
called for a freeze on that, instead, will spend over $400 billion in 
spending. The stimulus package, we called for something that spent half 
as much money and would have created twice as many jobs according to 
the economic projections that were relied upon.
  Now, the capstone of this first 100 days is an unbelievable budget 
conference report that projects to spend more than $3.5 trillion this 
coming year and which forecasts budget deficits as far as the eye can 
see.
  Much has been made about the fact that this year, the budget deficit 
will be approximately $1.7 trillion, but that includes the $1 trillion 
in spending. It includes the omnibus appropriations

[[Page H4895]]

bill that we talked about here. And yet at the end of this time, the 
majority feels that it is worth boasting that we will have cut that 
deficit by two-thirds, to more than $500 billion. In the entire history 
of this country, our budget deficit has exceeded $500 billion only once 
or twice to this point. Yet this budget plan projects $500 billion 
budget deficits for as far as the eye can see and raises our national 
debt over the next decade to more than $23 trillion.
  We talk about these numbers like they are abstract concepts. A 
million dollars is a stack of thousand dollar bills 4 inches high. A 
trillion dollars is a stack of thousand dollar bills 63 miles high. For 
just this next year, we project a deficit of more than $1.2 trillion, 
75 miles high up into outer space. And that's where this budget 
belongs.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz).
  Ms. SCHWARTZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your great work on this 
budget.
  The budget is more than numbers on a page. It is a statement of 
priorities and values and goals of our President, the Congress, and our 
Nation. The budget embraces the President's goals of rebuilding the 
economy and creating new jobs, restoring fiscal integrity and making 
investments for our future prosperity and security.
  Simply put, we will not be economically competitive unless we meet 
these economic and fiscal challenges and make these essential 
investments. This budget meets these goals. It sets us on a path 
towards health care reform with a goal of containing costs, improving 
quality, and expanding access to coverage.
  We hear about the 47 million Americans without insurance. But they 
are also more than numbers. When I was back in the district a couple 
weeks ago, I was visiting a local college, Penn State Abington. It's a 
commuter campus of Penn State in my district. I met with a panel of 
young people, all articulate, all bright, all working hard at school.
  One young woman, 21 years old, said she was a daughter of a single 
mother who makes about $20,000 a year. She's not an only child. She had 
been covered by CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program, until 
she was too old. She is now a full-time student. She works almost full 
time to make ends meet. She tried to get health insurance, and she 
simply couldn't afford it. She recently got sick and went to the 
hospital and now has a bill for $7,000, a bill she worries about every 
day, a debt she doesn't know how she will ever repay, and, of course, 
she worries about getting sick again in the future.
  This budget enables Congress to develop a uniquely American solution 
to both coverage and costs so that that young woman and the millions 
like her without health coverage will be able to get it, a plan that 
will include and be built on innovation, technology, incentives for an 
effective delivery system, renewed commitment to prevention and 
consumer protections in a private and public marketplace.
  We cannot sustain the status quo, nor should we. It's about time for 
us to pass this budget resolution and get to the task ahead.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from the Budget Committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Jordan).
  Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, let's cut right to the chase. This budget is an attack 
on freedom. It's an assault on fundamental liberties. I mean, you just 
go down the line. Tax increases, record tax increases in this bill 
which deny opportunities to Americans to use their money to spend on 
their goals, their dreams, their kids, their grandkids--the largest tax 
increase in history.
  Spending. Unprecedented levels of spending. We've heard all the 
stats, but this budget piles up more spending over the next decade than 
the previous 43 Presidents combined. We've heard it ``from George to 
George,'' from Washington to Bush, we don't pile up as much deficit as 
we do over the next decade with this budget--denying future Americans 
the opportunities they need to achieve their goals and their dreams, to 
reach what we would all call the American Dream.
  Third, further nationalizes health care. Think about this. The 
ability to make health care decisions should be between you and your 
family and your physician, you and your family and your personal 
doctor, not some board in Washington, not some bureaucrats in D.C. who 
think they know all the answers. Again, denial of freedom and liberty 
for Americans across the board.
  Then finally, let me finish with this. Cap-and-trade, the largest 
energy tax in history. It will require every single American, all 304 
million Americans, to pay more because now energy is going to cost 
more, which means everything we produce will cost more. Every single 
American will pay more, hurting us at a time when we're trying to get 
out of a recession.
  Any four of these are bad anytime. But to do all four when we're 
trying to recover from a recession just makes no sense. This cap-and-
trade, the Heritage Foundation did a study released 1 month ago. 
Districts that are heavy in manufacturing--like the one I have the 
privilege of representing--are so hard hit because you have got to have 
energy to produce the goods and services that our economy requires. If 
you want to be the leading economy in the world, you have to have 
energy. This thing is going to lead to an energy tax that will be 
unprecedented.
  Again, up and down the line we deny liberty, we deny opportunity to 
Americans with this budget. That's why I would urge my colleagues to 
vote ``no.''
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time 
remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Five-and-a-half. Five-and-a-half.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 90 seconds to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, the House deserves an accurate record 
before it renders judgment on this budget. It's important that we know 
that accurate record.
  We've heard that the budget imposes ``the largest energy tax in 
history.'' That is not so. The budget does not refer to cap-and-trade. 
It doesn't impose energy taxes on families the way that it was 
described. It simply isn't the case.
  We've heard that the budget ``nationalizes health care.'' The fact of 
the matter is that the budget sets up a process where this House will 
consider and debate legislation that will help to reduce costs for 
covered Americans and extend insurance to Americans who do not have 
coverage. There is nothing about nationalization of health care.
  We've heard consistently that this has a significant tax increase on 
small businesses. The fact of the matter is that any tax change that is 
contemplated in the health care plan will be limited to a repeal of the 
tax breaks the prior administration gave the wealthiest Americans. The 
record shows that 98 percent of small business filers will not be 
included in any such consideration.
  Finally, we hear that the budget doubles the deficit, one of the 
Members on the other side said. Not so. This budget reduces the deficit 
by two-thirds, but more importantly and profoundly, it puts us back on 
a path to the economic growth and prosperity which preceded the prior 
administration.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2\1/2\ 
minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have got a letter here I would like to read to my colleagues that 
lets you know exactly what we're doing to the American people.
  This is a letter from some people in Carmel, Indiana. They start off:
  ``Dear Congressman Burton:
  ``As an 82-year-old retired secondary teacher and athletics coach, I 
am writing you this letter to let you know that I have never received a 
personal response from a legislative representative of local, State, or 
Nation.'' And he just got a letter from me.
  Then he says, ``In my original letter I was not able to express 
totally the depth of my hurt from the current economic environment 
sweeping our beloved country. Beyond the economic pressures of the day, 
we are faced with the collapse of capitalism and the inroads of 
socialism into our government. My wife and I, celebrating our

[[Page H4896]]

60th wedding anniversary in 2009, have lived through the thirties 
depression and skimped and clawed our way from earning $2,900 annually 
to a magnificent dollar amount of $45,000 annually at retirement in 
1990.
  ``It all started in the late fall of 2007. We had invested and saved 
a considerable amount of money for a satisfactory retirement. Since 
that date, our conservative living, and a very modest budget, has seen 
the national economy lose more than $250,000 of our retirement savings. 
Frankly, at this point in time, we're scared to death.
  ``You may, and we wish that you would, send copies of this letter to 
President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid. They have no 
idea what they are doing to we constituents.
  ``I am sorry to cry on your shoulders, but my wife and I in 
concurrence do thank you for your wonderful letter of response. You 
touched our hearts deeply.''

                              {time}  1915

  ``They have no idea what they are doing to America and your 
constituents.''
  This is a big problem. This is the largest budget in history, the 
largest tax increase in history. You really need to know what you are 
doing to the American people, and here is a perfect example. And the 
people's names are Mr. and Mrs. Shipley.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the chairman very much.
  To my good friend from Indiana, we do respect the individuality of 
Americans. We are the pull ourselves up by the bootstraps, and we are 
the fighting and the tough; and we get going when it gets tough.
  This budget is an American budget. It respects the uniqueness of 
America. And we don't take away from people who have theirs, but what 
we do recognize is that we will not be the greatest country that we 
want to be if we don't bring everyone up at the same time. And so this 
legislation reflects that.
  And in particular, I think it is important to note that we do address 
rising costs in health care. It is going up. We are going to address 
the question of physician/patient relationship. We are going to set us 
on a path to increased coverage and to provide a pay-for.
  We recognize that this is an element of the American psyche; I have 
been working hard, I want to see others working hard. But Madam 
Speaker, it is important that this budget reflect the fact that people 
are hurting, people are in need.
  We need an economic recovery to get this economy right-side up and 
allow it to turn and then allow us to invent and build. That is why I 
am supporting this budget, because even in Texas, the oil capital of 
the Nation in Houston, Texas, we are looking toward increasing energy 
programs, providing for alternative energies. This legislation 
accommodates promoting energy independence, also a seamless energy 
policy.
  I believe this is the right direction to go. This is a budget that 
respects America and Americans, and it believes in getting us on the 
right track.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the vice 
ranking member of the Budget Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have listened very carefully to this debate, as short as it is, 
Madam Speaker. I have listened to my friend, the distinguished vice 
chairman, the gentlelady from Pennsylvania, say that these budgets are 
about values more than numbers. I couldn't agree with her more. It is 
clear that the Democratic budget values spending. It is clear that the 
Democratic budget values taxing. It is clear that the Democratic budget 
values debt, debt as far as the eye can see, Madam Speaker.
  Now, almost without exception, Democrat after Democrat Member have 
come to issue a history lesson to Members of this body. Well, I have a 
history lesson of my own. When Republicans were in control of Congress 
and budget deficits were $300 billion and falling, the gentleman from 
Maryland, who is now our majority leader, said, ``They have instigated 
a dangerous spiral of deficits and debt that constitute nothing less 
than fiscal child abuse.'' The gentlelady from California, who is now 
our Speaker--again, when the Republicans controlled the body, we had 
deficits $300 billion and falling--said, ``This is immoral, 
irresponsible and just totally immoral to ask for my children and 
grandchildren to pay for it.'' And now, Madam Speaker, on their watch, 
the deficit has gone from roughly $160 billion to $1.8 trillion, and 
there is silence, stone cold silence. Where are the accusations now of 
fiscal child abuse?
  This is a budget that will place more debt on our children than has 
ever been placed before. This is a budget that in 10 years will triple 
the national debt, create more debt in the next 10 years than in the 
previous 220 years of our history. Yet, where are my Democratic 
colleagues to talk about the fiscal child abuse?
  Spending. Increasing spending almost 9 percent. Almost every family 
budget that pays for the Federal budget is having to cut back, but not 
the government, no, no, no, no, no, not the government budget.
  You know, Madam Speaker, there was a time in our Nation's history 
where people believed that you work hard today so your children could 
have a better tomorrow. And this Democratic budget takes that ethic, 
turns it on its head and says, we will let government live easier today 
so our children have to work harder tomorrow.
  That is not the America I grew up in. It is not the America I want to 
leave to my 7-year-old daughter and my 5-year-old son. There is a 
better way.
  Madam Speaker, you cannot borrow and spend your way into prosperity. 
This is a budget that is not solving the Nation's economic crisis; it 
is exploiting the Nation's economic crisis. It must be rejected.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz).
  Ms. SCHWARTZ. I just want to make it very clear--not only on behalf 
of myself, but all of my colleagues. We have spoken quite a bit about, 
yes, the values and the investments we are making in this budget, but 
we have also spoken about our deep concern and our responsibility going 
forward on the debt.
  Let's be clear; this administration and this Congress inherited a 
$1.3 trillion deficit for this year. And yes, there were some additions 
made because of the terrible economy we are in, the need to respond to 
this economic situation and to create those new jobs. And this budget 
makes a commitment to reduce the annual deficit by two-thirds in 5 
years, an ambitious goal, and one we are determined to meet.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from South Carolina has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, I will consume my 1\1/2\ 
minutes.
  Madam Speaker, let me just address what has been said here. This 
President inherited a terrible fiscal crisis. Well, you know what this 
President inherited? It inherited a Democratic majority that ran 
Congress for the last 2 years that gave us all of this spending and 
these higher deficits.
  But here is the question; yes, there is a bad fiscal situation on our 
hands in this country. Yes, the President inherited a difficult 
situation. The question is, is he making it better or is he making it 
worse? All of these complaints about the higher deficit that has been 
inherited, about this spending that has occurred over the last 8 years, 
and what is the response? More of it. More spending, more deficits, 
more debt.
  One of the reasons why the majority decided not to follow the 
President's lead with a 10-year budget and go with a 5-year budget is 
because the day after the 5-year budget, the deficit goes right back on 
up. One of the reasons why they put all these gimmicks in this bill was 
to try and make that deficit look as if it were smaller than it 
actually is. You take the gimmicks away, it is another $1.127 trillion 
in deficit spending. The deficit never gets to 3 percent of GDP, which 
all economists from the right and left think is unsustainable. This 
budget puts us on an unsustainable course.
  Madam Speaker, we are going to be back here again talking about what 
to do to fix the budget because this budget will need fixing, and 
that's going to happen.

[[Page H4897]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina has 2 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The gentleman from Texas said this was not the America he grew up in, 
but he grew up in Mr. Bush's America. During the 8 years of the Bush 
administration, the President came into office, we had a debt in this 
country of a little over $5 trillion. When he left office, the debt was 
a little over $12 trillion, and a deficit of $1.845 trillion. So a lot 
of last year's deficit becomes this year's debt. A lot of that debt was 
attributable to what happened in the last administration, too.
  He said it continually, we increase spending. Once again, in terms of 
outlays, this bill will decrease spending by $300 billion, from $3.9 
trillion--which is way too much--to $3.6 trillion. That is a $300 
billion reduction.
  As for taxes, raising taxes, this bill cuts taxes by $764 billion 
over 5 years and by $1.7 trillion over 10 years. Those are the facts. 
It can't be refuted. And that is why I think you can fairly and rightly 
say this is a deficit reduction bill which nevertheless accommodates 
values that we consider good for the country.
  We will pick up tomorrow, I suppose, Madam Speaker.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2 of House Resolution 
371, further consideration on the conference report is postponed.

                          ____________________