[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 8 (Thursday, January 20, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H373-H376]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1110
                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the majority leader, the gentleman 
from Virginia, for the purpose of inquiring about the schedule for the 
coming week.
  Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman from Maryland, the Democratic whip, 
for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour 
and 2 p.m. for legislative business with votes postponed until 6:30 
p.m.
  On Tuesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate 
and noon for legislative business. The House will recess no later than 
5 p.m. to allow a security sweep of the House Chamber prior to the 
President's State of the Union address. The House will meet again at 
approximately 8:35 p.m. in a joint session with the Senate for the 
purpose of receiving an address from the President of the United 
States.
  On Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for legislative 
business.
  During the week, the House will consider at least one bill under 
suspension of the rules, which will be announced by close of business 
tomorrow. In addition, we will consider H. Res. 38, a resolution 
reducing non-security spending to fiscal year 2008 levels or Less, and 
a bill of the public's choosing--via the

[[Page H374]]

YouCut program--to reduce Federal spending and the deficit by 
terminating taxpayer financing of Presidential election campaigns and 
party conventions; saving taxpayers $520 million in mandatory spending 
according to CBO's estimate last year.
  Mr. HOYER. I want to thank the gentleman for informing us of the 
schedule for the week to come.
  I want to thank, at the outset, not only the gentleman but the 
Speaker as well for the respect and consideration they have given 
during this current tragic situation that confronted us in Tucson and 
the critical injuries sustained by our colleague, Gabby Giffords. I 
want to thank Mr. Cantor in particular for his very strong statement, 
as well as the Speaker's very strong statement, that an attack on any 
individual who serves is an attack on all of us irrespective of party 
or philosophy. I think we all have raised prayers for the victims who 
lost their lives, their families, prayers for those who are either in 
the process of recovering or are now out of danger, and of course for 
our beloved colleague, Congresswoman Giffords, as well.
  So I want to thank the gentleman for his leadership and the Speaker's 
leadership in joining with our leader and myself in leading the House 
in what I thought was a very appropriate and united response to that 
tragedy.
  We are heartened by the progress that Congresswoman Giffords is 
making, and we look forward to her quick return.
  Now, Mr. Cantor, if I can, next week we are scheduled to leave on 
Wednesday. I know there has been an articulation of an intent to try to 
get out by noon on the days that we leave. Would you expect that to be 
the case this next week?
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. CANTOR. First of all, I thank the gentleman for his kind 
statements regarding the expressions of grief and support that I think 
all Members of this body have expressed to Gabby Giffords, her family, 
and her staff. Our thoughts and prayers remain with all of them, and 
certainly to the victims and their families. And certainly they all 
know that we are thinking of them.
  Mr. Speaker, as far as the schedule is concerned, if you will recall, 
the commitment on our schedule was the finishing time would be 3 p.m. 
on the last day we are here. We specifically had indicated that January 
is going to be a little different and an exception due to the 
organizing processes, State of the Union, et cetera. The expectation is 
to begin that in February, as was originally expressed; although, we do 
intend to try to be as expeditious as possible on Wednesday. The exact 
timing of our departure and finishing up depends on the actual rule 
coming from the Rules Committee, including the amendment debate and the 
structure for the Presidential election fund bill. We expect an 
announcement by the Rules Committee chairman later today on that.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comment.
  Given that response, can I ask the gentleman: Would he expect there 
to be an open rule with reference to that bill?
  Mr. CANTOR. The gentleman understands, as the Rules Committee 
chairman presides over the Rules Committee and entertains the 
submission of amendments. As to exactly, I can't answer that right now, 
and that will be determined by the Rules Committee.
  Mr. HOYER. Not only do I recall that as being a fact, I also recall 
it as an answer that I used to give the gentleman on a regular basis.
  But I am certainly hopeful, as he was hopeful, given the 
representations of transparency and openness, that there would be 
opportunities to amend. I know that Mr. Van Hollen spoke to that in the 
Rules Committee, and I would hope that we could see that policy which 
has been expressed by your side pursued in this instance as well as 
future instances. I thank the gentleman for his response.
  Let me ask the gentleman: There was some criticism raised when we 
passed a budget enforcement resolution that we hadn't passed a full 
budget. In that budget enforcement resolution, as you recall, A, we 
articulated a specific number; and, B, that number was voted on by the 
entire House.

                              {time}  1120

  It is my understanding that the proposition that will be put before 
the House next week will provide and give unilateral authority to the 
chairman of the Budget Committee to set a number and that that number 
will not be voted upon by the House pursuant to the authority granted 
in that resolution.
  Is that an accurate reading of that resolution?
  Mr. CANTOR. To be clear, once the House adopts the resolution next 
week, the resolution will then instruct Chairman Ryan to cap non-
security discretionary spending for the remainder of fiscal year 2011 
at fiscal year 2008 levels. That is the purpose of our adopting the 
resolution, acting as the House as a whole, instructing Chairman Ryan 
to cap non-security discretionary spending at 2008 levels for the 
remainder of this fiscal year.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, I'd say to the gentleman, I know he shares with 
me the realization that people across this country--families, 
businesses--are having to face some tough choices. We started this 
Congress, I think, together, committed to demonstrating that we are 
willing to make those tough choices--thus, the resolution for next 
week.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his response.
  I do not want to be argumentative, but I have just received your 
amended copy of the resolution, and as I read on your second page, it 
says ``the remainder of fiscal year 2011 that assumes non-security 
spending at fiscal year 2008 levels or less.''
  The implication in that, it seems to me, is that Mr. Ryan 
unilaterally can set a number which has not been agreed to by the 
House, but under the power granted in this resolution would bind the 
House to a number to which it had never agreed.
  Is that an accurate reading of that? Could, in fact, under this 
resolution Mr. Ryan set a number that is less than, as your resolution 
says, 2008 numbers?
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman that the resolution 
provides for the capping of spending levels at '08 levels.
  The gentleman also knows that the Speaker has been very consistent in 
his statements, saying that we are going to have an open rule process 
when it comes to spending bills. In fact, that is what we said during 
the last campaign season in the Pledge to America.
  So, in working with that commitment as well as the language of this 
resolution, the budget chairman, Mr. Ryan, will be instructed to enter 
into the Record a cap of spending levels for the remainder of the 
fiscal year to be placed at 2008 levels.
  Mr. HOYER. So would it be therefore accurate that the ``or less'' is 
superfluous and is not intended to give Mr. Ryan the authority to set a 
figure at less than 2008 levels?
  Mr. CANTOR. I would say to the gentleman I disagree with that 
characterization of the language ``or less,'' and would just say that, 
again, the Speaker is committed to an open process on spending bills. I 
assume that we will see coming to the floor every attempt and effort to 
try and maintain some sense that this Congress is going to be a cut-
and-grow Congress and that we are about trying to find savings 
everywhere we can so that we can get this country back onto a 
trajectory of fiscal sustainability.
  So I say to the gentleman, no, this is not something that we intend 
to be meaningless, that we are serious. The cap is consistent with our 
commitment to the people of this country that the levels of spending 
for the remainder of the fiscal year will not exceed 2008. It is our 
hope that we can continue to find additional savings so that, yes, we 
could even find ourselves below '08 levels; but the cap is 2008 levels.
  Mr. HOYER. The point that I am trying to make, and perhaps not as 
clearly as I need to make it, is that what we are in that resolution 
giving is to one person--one person--in this Congress the authority, 
without consideration by this House, to set the number, without 
hearings, on what we will, as you articulate, cap spending levels at 
for fiscal year 2011.
  As I understand it, there have been no hearings by the Budget 
Committee, no hearings by the Appropriations Committee, no hearings by 
the Ways and Means Committee, or by any other committee involved in 
fiscal matters as to what the ramifications of that cap will be to 
individual programs or individual Americans.

[[Page H375]]

  I share the gentleman's view and have voted consistently, as I voted 
for the balanced budget amendment, as the gentleman knows, last we 
considered it, to bring our fiscal house into order. I think neither 
party can necessarily take sole responsibility for doing so or not 
doing so when it comes to fiscal balance.
  But I do tell my friend that, with respect to transparency and 
openness and to the inclusion of all the Members of the body, it is, I 
think, not consistent with that objective to give to one person, 
however brilliant that person is--and I happen to have great respect, 
as the gentleman knows and as I have said so publicly in the press, for 
Mr. Ryan, who I think is a very positive, effective, important Member 
of this body; but I am not for giving any one person in this body the 
authority to unilaterally set the number at which we will fund 
America's government for the next 7 months.
  I yield to my friend to see if he might have a response to that 
because, in his responses to me--and I understand the cap--but at any 
number below that, at 2007, 2006, 2005 levels, it seems to me this 
resolution authorizes Mr. Ryan to set such figures as he unilaterally 
determines is an appropriate figure. In his mind, that may be an 
appropriate figure; but it is not necessarily the same figure that this 
body voting in a transparent, open way might select.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I will just respond to the gentleman by 
saying we are in the position we are in because the majority that he 
participated in in the last Congress failed to live up to its 
obligation in passing a budget and in even passing any appropriations 
bills short of a continuing resolution. That's why we are here today, 
because there is a mess that has been created from the last majority, 
and we are trying to clean that up.
  We have committed to a transparent and open process; and I have said 
to the gentleman that, when the CR comes to the floor, we will see 
Members on both sides of the aisle have an opportunity to amend the 
continuing resolution according to the way they think that we ought to 
be saving taxpayer dollars.
  So, again, I disagree with the gentleman's assertion that somehow 
there is a lack of transparency here. We have said all along the cap on 
our spending will be at 2008 levels for the remainder of the fiscal 
year. If this House works its will and if Members on either side are 
able to gain the majority of votes in this House to achieve even more 
spending below the 2008 levels, then that will be the will of this 
House.
  Again, the gentleman understands well why we are where we are, and we 
look forward to working together to go and produce a spending 
resolution here that begins to address the mess that was left before.
  Mr. HOYER. Let me ask the gentleman: Is the gentleman representing to 
me that this resolution will, in fact, result in 2008 levels of 
expenditure so that Members, who are being asked to vote on this, will 
have a certitude of the number on which they are voting--that's my only 
question--so that they will know on what authorization they are giving, 
what budget direction they are giving, to the members of the 
Appropriations Committee?
  Mr. CANTOR. The budget directive is 2008 levels or less. As the 
gentleman well knows, the intention is to allow the Appropriations 
Committee to do its work, to report a resolution to the floor. The body 
will work its will according to the insistence of the majority and the 
Speaker that we have an open process on spending bills.

                              {time}  1130

  It is our hope that we can work to achieve even greater savings for 
the taxpayers of this country.
  Mr. HOYER. I understand that, and I thank the gentleman. I know that 
he has indicated that we are going to be considering what I believe to 
be a $52 million cut--that's important money--to reach your $100 
billion. However, if you do it at that level per week, of course, you 
will take approximately 50 years to get to $100 billion if we consider 
one every week that we are in session.
  My presumption is that you will be informing us of those 
opportunities to cut as well, giving us opportunities on our side. 
There may well be Members on our side who want to join in making sure 
that we spend our money as effectively and efficiently as possible. But 
we also know and the commissions that have reported know that while 
these types of expenditures are important to review, I don't know that 
there have been any hearings on this YouCut. I know that this has been 
in response to the Web page question that you have propounded to 
people--I don't know how many responses you have received to that. But 
are you intending to have hearings in relevant committees on future 
propositions to cut?
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman, first of all, 
as far as the $520 million--not $52 million--is concerned, as he knows 
that is mandatory spending, that is not discretionary spending, and 
would be different and apart from the commitment that we just spoke 
about at '08 levels.
  I would also say to the gentleman that we will be glad to have 
hearings once committees are organized. As the gentleman knows, it's 
been a little bit slow in upstart just given the transition of 
leadership, et cetera. We are waiting for your side in some instances. 
But we hear from committee chairmen things are working well, so we hope 
that committees will be up and organized to have hearings.
  But in order for us to deliver on our commitment that we are going to 
bring up a spending cut bill every week, this body will be considering 
a bill providing for cutting the Presidential election fund that has 
been in existence for some time. As the gentleman well knows, this 
tends to be of some controversy in some quarters. There are those who 
believe that this is an attempt to drive this country towards a public 
finance system for campaigns. Obviously there are those in this country 
who believe that's what should happen. But knowing full well the 
controversy, I'm sure we will have a robust debate. And I am looking 
forward, Mr. Speaker, to as many cuts to this fund as the gentleman's 
side may offer and look forward to a robust debate on the issue.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  And let me ask again, does the gentleman intend, once the committees 
are up and running--I understand in a transition it takes some time--
that the cuts that you are going to propose on a weekly basis will have 
been subjected to committee oversight and hearings, with the public 
having an opportunity to testify on the consequences of those cuts?
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman again, yes, it is our 
intention to have a full and open debate on all of these issues. As the 
gentleman recalls, this process began last June, or in the spring or 
so, that we said we were going to redirect the focus to make sure that 
we are in line with the will of the people, and that is trying to do 
everything we can to remind all of us of the import of cutting 
spending, and therefore this process begins. But yes, to the 
gentleman's question about hearings, we welcome that and would expect 
that.
  Mr. HOYER. Good. I appreciate that response.
  Lastly, I ask my friend, one of the significant issues that will be 
confronting us in the coming months will be the extension of the debt 
limit to ensure that America continues to pay the bills that it has 
incurred and therefore maintain fiscal stability not only in this 
country but throughout the world. The Speaker and you have both made, I 
think, very positive comments on the fact that, as unwanted as such a 
vote may be, it is, nevertheless, as the Speaker pointed out, an adult 
vote--that I took to mean a responsible vote--to ensure the fiscal 
stability of our country.
  Does the gentleman anticipate a clean up-or-down vote on that issue 
when it becomes timely to vote on that issue sometime in March of 
April?
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would begin by saying to the gentleman, as 
he knows, it's unclear when the Federal Government will actually hit 
the debt ceiling, and we will be closely monitoring that date. But 
before we reach that date, it is very, very important that we prove 
that this Congress is willing to cut spending. And the House, as the 
discussion today indicates, will be taking those necessary steps each 
week that we are here, leading up to an eventual vote. In fact, I would 
call on the leader on the other side of the Capitol, Mr. Reid, to 
follow suit.

[[Page H376]]

  The continuing resolution vote gives us the first real opportunity to 
demonstrate our commitment to cutting spending. The debt limit will be 
another opportunity for this Congress to cut spending. And as I think 
the gentleman knows, I have said repeatedly that we will not accept an 
increase in the debt limit without serious spending cuts and reforms, 
and I look forward to joining with the gentleman debate on this House 
floor. Hopefully we can have the Senate join us, as well as the 
President, towards that end.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  It's my understanding, from the gentleman's response, that if in the 
eyes of you or Mr. Boehner or your side of the aisle serious spending 
cuts have not been effected, that you would oppose the extension of the 
debt limit.
  Is that what I hear you saying?
  Mr. CANTOR. I would say to the gentleman this: We have been charged 
with an obligation by the people of this country to get our fiscal 
house in order. We intend to be very deliberate and focused on cutting 
spending while making sure we are doing all we can to grow the economy 
and the private-sector jobs. It is our intent to prove that this House 
and this Congress--hopefully Leader Reid will follow suit--will deliver 
on that commitment.
  The public, as the gentleman knows all too well, is tired of business 
as usual. They don't want to see this country continue to incur debt as 
it has in the past without some indication that things are changing, 
without some indication that serious spending cuts have been 
implemented and reforms effected, and that will be our intent.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that response. And I hate to 
keep pressing him, but if his hopes are not realized--and I don't know 
the answer as to whether they will be, but at some point in time we 
will be confronted with an alternative of whatever the facts may be 
with respect to what we are able to pass through this House, the 
Senate, and get signed by the President, we will be confronted with the 
consequences of our past behavior, and I underline ``our,'' o-u-r, 
spending that we have incurred. And I don't want to go through the 
entire debate that you and I always go through, so I won't do it, but 
we will be confronted with, as the Speaker says, an adult moment as to 
whether or not we will, in light of the consequences of past behavior, 
take actions necessary to preclude America from defaulting on its 
debts. And I simply ask the gentleman, will we have the opportunity to 
have an up-or-down vote on that issue under the circumstances where we 
have reached, as the gentleman points out--we don't know the exact 
date--the extent of present authority?
  Mr. CANTOR. I would say to the gentleman, Mr. Speaker, that the vote 
on the debt limit comes within the context of our demonstrating a 
commitment to cut spending, to effect reforms. And the President as 
well as the gentleman's side here in this House have said both that 
they would like to see and join us in cutting spending. This debt-limit 
vote comes in the context of all that we are going to be able to do 
over the next several months. And we've got to be demonstrating that or 
frankly the public will not want us to accept any notion that we're 
going to continue business as usual unless we've demonstrated that 
things are changing. That's why I continue to say to the gentleman that 
we will not accept an increase in the debt limit without serious 
spending cuts and reforms.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.

                          ____________________