[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 20, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H247-H248]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEFICIT COMMISSION BY EXECUTIVE ORDER
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. WOLF. Today the press, Mr. Speaker, is reporting that a backroom
deal has been cut with Democratic leadership to create a deficit
cutting commission by executive order. I oppose this effort, and so
will the American people.
In light of this news, the remarks that Representative Lamar Smith of
Texas made on the House floor this morning ring truer and more urgent
than ever. Representative Smith offered a series of lessons to be
learned from yesterday's special Senate election in Massachusetts. He
said all true reform starts with the voice of the people. The people
will not have a choice in a deficit commission established by executive
order. He also said common sense trumps partisanship. A commission
through executive order negotiated by one party is the height of
partisanship. He also said voters can exercise real independence. Where
is the voice of the people in a process that will not go beyond the
Beltway?
Mr. Smith correctly noted that one-party control leads to arrogance.
We are seeing today an arrogance of power on a party that forecloses
the minority from a seat at the table. To be fair, the Republicans in
the majority were arrogant at times. And Mr. Smith concluded that we
should be listening to the people, not defying them. The people of
Massachusetts spoke yesterday. They proved that when the people get mad
enough, anything is possible, even in Massachusetts. Lawmakers in
Congress on both sides of the aisle would be wise to hear that message
loud and clear, yet the Obama administration doesn't seem to be
listening.
There are a number of serious problems being exposed as details of
the administration's executive order commission are revealed. Any
commission should be authentically bipartisan, passed by the Congress.
Press reports indicate that instead of putting every spending program
and tax policy on the table, discretionary spending would be exempt.
How can we have an honest conversation about the Nation's financial
health without looking at discretionary funds that accounted for more
than 33 percent of Federal spending in '09?
The $447 billion omnibus appropriations bill that was considered by
Congress and signed into law in December corresponded with the
Democrats' budget blueprint that increased nondefense discretionary
spending by 12 percent over the previous year. When all appropriations
spending is combined, the Democratic majority will have increased
nondefense, nonveterans discretionary spending by 85 percent over the
last 2 fiscal years. The American household has certainly not seen
their income rise by 85 percent in recent years.
Simply put, discretionary spending, with the spending set by annual
appropriations levels of Congress, matter. A deficit reduction
commission that is barred from looking at one-third of the Federal
budget is a fig leaf. The bipartisan commission process I have talked
about for nearly 4 years puts everything, entitlements, tax policy,
discretionary spending, everything on the table for discussion by the
commission members.
Moreover, the American people will be cut out of the process under
the President's plan. The SAFE Commission plan I have advocated for
includes legitimate public engagement, mandating public town hall-style
meetings. But under President Obama's plan the public voice will be
nonexistent. There will be no input from the hardworking taxpayers in
our communities. This is not the right way to form public policy.
Perhaps the most glaring sleight of hand, one I believe the American
people will recognize and refute, is that the Democratic leadership
intends to bring the commission recommendations up for a vote in
Congress, but only after the mid-term elections and
[[Page H248]]
before the new Congress begins in 2011. It would be a lame duck vote.
Lawmakers who are retiring or get defeated could vote on a set of
recommendations with regard to entitlement spending and tax policy, but
never be held accountable by the American people. Is it right for
outgoing Members of Congress to consider proposals that could affect
every single American knowing that days and weeks later they would no
longer be answerable to the voters of the district they once
represented?
Between the Democrats and Republicans in both chambers, over 30
Members have already announced they are retiring or running for another
office, and this number will grow. During the lame duck session, some
outgoing Members may already be looking for new jobs, which could well
be lobbying special interest groups and other stakeholders that have a
vested interest in the outcome of the vote on the commission's
recommendations. Yet the Obama administration is setting up a process
that would allow these outgoing lawmakers to vote on the commission's
recommendations and run the risk of blurring the lines between what is
best for the American people and best for their future employer.
Any recommendation put forward should be considered by the newly
elected Congress, which would have to publicly stand by their vote on
the commission's recommendation. This Congress has run up the country's
credit card to a point of no return, and now the administration wants
to be able to tout a bipartisan solution to spending for political
cover to survive the upcoming elections.
A commission through executive order is political gamesmanship. It is
a blatant effort by the administration to find political cover after
advocating for the $787 billion economic stimulus, supporting health
care reform being negotiated behind closed doors that could cost a
trillion, and pushing other budget breakers that are wildly unpopular
in the eyes of the American people.
In closing, the American people understand the depth of our financial
problems. They recognize the spending gorge that Congress has embarked
on since the Obama administration began, and they will not be fooled
about by a fig leaf commission established by executive order. Just ask
the people of Massachusetts.
____________________