[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 107 (Monday, July 18, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H5135-H5141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1920
                         CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Ellmers). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Madam Speaker, we are going to discuss tonight 
the cut, cap, and balance bill that will come before this body tomorrow 
morning. I just want to express some thoughts about how desperately 
important I believe this bill is for America. I have seen in the media 
oftentimes the bill diminished. Madam Speaker, I believe this is an 
opportunity that is very unusual for those of us in this body to have, 
where we can put this Nation on a track to fiscal sanity and where we 
can truly do that thing that we were sent here to do.
  Madam Speaker, let me begin by saying that all financial budgets will 
eventually balance. No individual, no family, no business, and no 
government can indefinitely continue to spend more money than they take 
in without someone having to make up the difference. That includes the 
budget of the United States Federal Government. Neither Mr. Obama nor 
congressional Democrats can repeal the laws of mathematics.
  The Federal budget of the United States Government will eventually 
balance, Madam Speaker. The question is whether the House of 
Representatives, the United States Senate, and the White House will 
work together to balance this budget ourselves by wise policy, or 
national bankruptcy and financial ruin will do it for us.
  From the day Barack Obama walked into the White House, he has, with 
breathtaking arrogance, absolutely ignored economic and financial 
reality. It took America the first 216 years of its existence to 
accumulate the debt that Barack Obama has accumulated in the short 2\1/
2\-year span of his Presidency. During his short time in office, Madam 
Speaker, he has increased our Federal debt by nearly $4 trillion.
  Just to put that nearly $4 trillion in new debt in perspective, let 
me put it this way: if all of a sudden a wave of responsibility swept 
through this Chamber and we stopped all deficit spending and began to 
pay installments of $1 million every day to pay down the nearly $4 
trillion debt that Barack Obama has created in just 2\1/2\ years, it 
would take us more than 10,000 years to pay it off. And that's if we 
didn't have to pay one dime in interest, Madam Speaker.
  But, you see, we are not paying off Mr. Obama's debt by $1 million 
per day. We are going deeper into debt, more than 4,000 times that $1 
million a day every day under Mr. Obama's own submitted budget and 
deficit projection. Let me say that again: if we paid down the debt $1 
million a day, the debt that Mr. Obama has accumulated in his 2\1/2\ 
year Presidency, it would take us 10,000 years to do it. But we are not 
doing that. We are going deeper into debt, 4,000 times that much, every 
day, almost $4 billion per day.
  And then when speaking of the effort to reduce the deficit, the 
President has the hubris to tell conservative Republicans to take a 
balanced approach and to eat our peas. Madam Speaker, if there is 
anything more catastrophically out of balance than our Federal budget, 
it is the arrogance to competency ratio of this White House. We have 
already tried Mr. Obama's way. We have for far too long been testing 
Democrat economics 101; the theory, as Vice President Biden put it, we 
have to spend money to keep from going bankrupt.
  Madam Speaker, when it comes to balancing our budget, Mr. Obama and 
the liberal media have suggested that Republicans are unwilling to 
address the revenue side of the equation, but that isn't true either. 
Just because Republicans are not willing to increase job-killing tax 
rates on this country doesn't mean that we don't understand the revenue 
side of the equation.
  History and experience have demonstrated time and again that the best 
way to increase the amount of revenue coming into this government is to 
get out of the way and allow the private sector to increase the quality 
and number of jobs for the American people. This has historically 
resulted in the increased productivity and the broadening of the tax 
base in this amazing Nation.
  And yet the President is willing to ignore that history and the 
reality of the amazing American economic engine and kill the goose that 
lays the golden eggs by raising taxes. Madam Speaker, that is like 
saying putting additional weight on the back of a race horse will help 
him win more races.
  You will recall that the Democrats, when they had control of 
Congress, raised the debt limit six times. I so clearly remember the 
surreal spectacle at the time of then-majority leader of the House, 
Steny Hoyer, leading the entire Democrat caucus in a rousing standing 
ovation after the debt limit was raised by $2 trillion in 2010. We have 
watched as President Obama ran up a trillion-dollar deficit for the 
first time in history and then break that record the very next year, 
and then say that we would have $1 trillion-plus deficits ``for years 
to come.''
  We have watched as Mr. Obama and the administration promised that if 
we just allowed them to spend another $800 billion on their stimulus 
package that the economy would rebound and unemployment would never go 
beyond 8 percent. Now, Madam Speaker, the American people have 
awakened, and they are tired of Democrats telling them that 2 plus 2 
equals 13.
  So as we now find ourselves facing the prospect of raising the debt 
ceiling yet again, Republicans have said the only way we are going to 
consent to raising the debt ceiling is if we cut spending by the same 
amount we increase the debt ceiling and then if we give the people and 
the States of this Nation the historic opportunity to adopt a balanced 
budget amendment to our Constitution to put this country back on the 
track of fiscal sanity once again, Madam Speaker.
  Now, I know that Mr. Obama and the Democrats have falsely said that 
the balanced budget amendment is just a Republican plan to destroy 
Social Security and Medicare. But the truth is that the bill we will be 
voting on tomorrow does not cut Social Security, it does not cut 
Medicare, and it does not cut the compensation to our men and women in 
uniform by one dime. But the balanced budget amendment does

[[Page H5136]]

give us an honest chance of reforming and saving those programs and our 
country from bankruptcy in the future.

  Mr. Obama and the Democrats have constantly said that we need to take 
a ``balanced approach'' and include increased taxes in the equation. 
But I have already said, Madam Speaker, increasing the rate of taxes 
will decrease the productivity of this Nation and will ultimately 
decrease the revenue that comes into this government. It is the 
economic equivalent of mixing dirt and ice cream. It is a poor recipe 
to embrace in the name of balance.
  Madam Speaker, the truly balanced approach to this problem is a 
balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution. By passing 
this cut, cap, and balance bill, along with the balanced budget 
amendment, we have a rare opportunity, and it is one that may never 
come again, Madam Speaker, of doing something truly historic that will 
save this Nation and its people from economic ruin.
  Now, if the President and the Democrats will help us do this, 
together we can restore hope and confidence in capital markets inside 
the United States and really all over the world because those markets 
will see in the long run that America is going to make it.
  It may take 6 or 7 years to fully ratify this constitutional 
amendment once it is sent to the States. But we owe it to the States 
and to the people to give them this chance to save their Nation. In the 
meantime, we can work hard here to expand this economy and to balance 
this budget that we work with here every year so that when the 
amendment is ratified, we will be ready to go forward together as a 
Nation to embrace the greatest days we have ever seen.
  However, Madam Speaker, if the Democrats and the President are not 
willing to give America and the American people this chance by helping 
Republicans pass a balanced budget amendment in this Congress, the 
resulting consequences will be theirs alone, and I believe the people 
will hold them accountable for whatever financial disaster may follow.
  Madam Speaker, long ago Thomas Jefferson said: I wish it were 
possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be 
willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration 
of our government to the genuine principles of its Constitution. I mean 
an additional article taking from the Federal Government the power of 
borrowing.
  Madam Speaker, it turns out Thomas Jefferson was right the vast 
majority of the time, and we have been those who have seen the best of 
some of the principles that he espoused so long ago. How I wish his 
contemporaries had listened to him about the balanced budget amendment. 
But in this moment in history, America may get a second chance, Madam 
Speaker. But we may not get it again.
  I don't often quote Shakespeare, but long ago he wrote in a play this 
quote that I think applies to us today. He said:
  ``There is a tide in the affairs of men.
  Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
  Omitted, all the voyage of their life
  Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
  On such a full sea are we now afloat,
  And we must take the current when it serves,
  Or lose our ventures.''

                              {time}  1930

  In this time of crisis, we are also standing in a place where the 
tide is high and the opportunity is real for us to do something that 
will truly turn things around for this Nation.
  Madam Speaker, this is not the Democrat Congress of last year that 
gave a standing ovation to a $2 trillion increase in our debt limit. 
This is the Congress that was sent here by the American people to turn 
things around. And that starts by drawing the line on spending and 
saying thus far and no further and passing a balanced budget amendment 
to the United States Constitution. By the grace of God, Madam Speaker, 
that's exactly what we're going to do.
  With that, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Indiana for 
such time as he may consume.
  Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. I thank my colleague from Arizona for his 
learned words and eloquent words, quoting, Madam Speaker, Shakespeare. 
I'll begin by quoting Yogi Berra, that great fount of wit, wisdom, and 
good old American common sense. More recently, Yogi Berra said, When 
you come to a fork in the road, take it. We find ourselves as Americans 
right now certainly in a fork in the road--a fork in the road as a 
Nation. Either we must act boldly or some would say we face financial 
Armageddon. Unemployment is at 9.2 percent. Investment is down. Hiring 
is sluggish. The American people are anxious about where they're going 
to find jobs, where they're going to send their kids to school. People 
in southern Indiana ask me all the time what they're going to do as we 
fall further into the financial abyss. Our national debt is over $14 
trillion--and growing.
  We know we're not in the mess because the American people are taxed 
too little. We're in this mess because Washington spends too darned 
much. And we want to address that. So, as the President stands at this 
fork in the road, having no plan and refusing to lead, we know that we 
here in Congress must lead. We must act. We must, as we say in the 
United States Marine Corps, we must have a bias for action. Well, 
that's why we put forth this Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011. It's a 
responsible action.
  I'll briefly outline its finer points. First, it cuts total spending 
by $111 billion in fiscal year 2012. No changes to Social Security, no 
changes to Medicare, no changes to veterans' benefits. And considering 
the size and scope of the massive debt crisis we face in this country, 
it proposes a very modest cut of $111 billion next year--certainly a 
manageable down payment as we work to address this leviathan debt we 
face. It caps total Federal spending in the future as a portion of our 
economy--that is the cap component of this cut, cap, and balance plan--
and brings down by the end of the decade our Federal spending to less 
than 20 percent as a proportion of our economy. That's the post-World 
War II average. Very sensible, very responsible. And then, finally, it 
balances our budget. It does so through a balanced budget amendment 
that will come up for a vote later, subject to the normal super 
majority requirements in each House of Congress. This works in 49 of 
the 50 States across this great Nation. It will work here in 
Washington, too. If we have the courage to pass it.
  The cut, cap, and balance plan will restore confidence. It will 
restore confidence in investors around this world, people who are right 
now eyeballing this body, wondering whether or not we're going to pass 
a bold plan to address our financial situation and therefore maintain 
our high AAA credit rating. It will restore confidence in those who 
create jobs--the entrepreneurs, the innovators, the investors across 
the fruited plains whom people rely on for their family incomes. It 
will show them that we understand Washington has a problem, and we are 
prepared to address it in a very specific way.
  Finally, this will calm down, this will restore confidence among 
those we represent. Yeah, we have a deficit in Washington. And it's not 
just a financial deficit. It's a leadership deficit. We need to show 
the American people we understand our Federal Government must balance 
its books, just like American families and businesses are making hard 
decisions and balancing their own books during this difficult time.
  The President stands at this fork in the road. No plan, no action, no 
leadership. And he characteristically refuses to choose a path. We have 
laid out a path. The path is one of leadership. The path is one of 
choosing. I believe that to lead is to choose. We must choose. I 
encourage the members of this body, my esteemed colleagues, to choose 
the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I would now yield to the gentleman from 
Georgia for such time as he may consume.
  Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from Arizona and my 
friend from Indiana. This, to me, tomorrow, where we are today, is a 
monumental time in the history of this Nation. When we think about the 
decisions and the debate, the discussions, the rhetoric of tomorrow, it 
will be amazing to see who falls on which side. Because it's truly a 
choice. It is a decision. And we've heard that this is going to be a 
time of choosing. Tomorrow is the day.
  We've had reckless debt and deficit for years now. It's not a 
necessarily Democrat problem because Republicans have also been a part 
of the

[[Page H5137]]

problem. We've seen both parties guilty in this time of fiscal 
nonsense, the recklessness of Washington spending. But it's come to an 
end. And we have an opportunity before us that I think is going to be 
incredible.
  So, tomorrow, as the debate begins, I hope the Nation is watching. I 
hope the Nation is listening. I hope the Nation is witnessing their 
Members of Congress, whom they voted for, sent to office to represent 
them, watching to see how they will cast their vote. Of course, the 
President has already shown his cards. We know how he's going to cast 
his vote. I'd love to see us as a House pass it to the Senate, and the 
Senate move it to the President, and him look the American people 
square in the eye and say he is not for balancing the budget. He is not 
for cutting spending. He is not for capping the Federal Government. How 
defiant would that be to the American people?
  His quote today was, We don't need a constitutional amendment to do 
our jobs. Mr. President, the Constitution is there to protect the 
American people from their government. What better opportunity to 
protect them from the reckless spending of Washington than a balanced 
budget amendment sent to the States? We do need the Constitution to 
tell us how to balance the budget because apparently this place can't 
do it on its own. Year after year after year it's been out of balance, 
debt limits increased, spending out of control. And yet we have a 
President who now, without a plan, but a framework, we hear--only 
through press conference, press releases, and spokespersons--a 
framework. Is that a plan? No, it's not a plan. We hear the Senate has 
a plan. It's plan B, though. Why? Because plan A comes before the House 
tomorrow. Plan A is to cut the Federal Government spending now. It is 
to cap the Federal Government's size in the future. And it is to 
balance the budget forevermore. That is what America is seeking right 
now.
  So, the time truly is for choosing. And the question before us 
tomorrow as we all will watch the board light up, everyone will put in 
their voting card--they're really casting a couple of different 
decisions tomorrow. It's not just cut, cap, and balance, but it is: 
What is our vision for America. What will it be? What will America be 
in the future? That is the other question. I believe that those who 
cast that ``aye'' button tomorrow, the green button, they are casting 
their decision for a prosperous future for this country--a future in 
which we do live within our means, a future that ensures prosperity for 
the next generation. But then there are those, they'll cast a ``no'' 
vote. They'll cast the red vote. They will say, No, the status quo is 
acceptable. Out-of-control spending, yeah, we'll get it through it. The 
time will come, we will get by. Compromise is necessary. That will be 
the ``no'' vote tomorrow.
  Tomorrow's vote is so big. It is big. And I thank the gentleman from 
Arizona for leading this hour tonight because it's a precursor to the 
debate tomorrow--a debate that will be grand. I believe out of all the 
votes I've cast in my short time just over a year here, tomorrow's 
might be one of the most important votes I cast. And I stand before 
this House tonight, Madam Speaker, before you to say you I'll be 
casting that green vote for that prosperous future of this great Nation 
we have, to restore it, reclaim that liberty that we all know is so 
great and grand. And I look forward to joining many of my colleagues 
such as the gentleman from Arizona.
  Thank you.

                              {time}  1940

  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the distinguished gentleman.
  I now recognize the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. 
Bilbray).
  Mr. BILBRAY. Thank you.
  Madam Speaker, I am honored to speak to the words of my dear 
colleague from Arizona, and I appreciate that he not only quoted 
Shakespeare but that he also made a nautical reference to the facts of 
life when the tides change. As a child of the ocean, I appreciate that.
  Let me just say we've all got to understand how we got where we are 
today. The fact is, in '06, the American people were fed up with the 
Republicans spending too much, not because we had raised taxes or cut 
taxes, but they were fed up with our spending habits. Four years later, 
the same voters threw out the Democrats, not because they hadn't raised 
taxes but because they had expanded expenditures extraordinarily. So I 
think, if there were one indication that we ought to understand, it's 
that when you navigate on the ocean you've learned to know which way 
the waves are coming, which way the wind is coming, and you learn from 
your experience that there are some things that you don't want to 
fight.
  One is the will of the American people.
  As we look around the world, everybody celebrates the Arab Spring 
where the average person in Arab countries is standing up and saying, 
Not just ``no,'' but ``hell no.'' We're going to stand up and say, 
We've had enough. What's happening there is happening in America, too. 
The fact is that the average citizens in America, just like around the 
world, now can communicate through the Internet, and no big government, 
big operation, big cartel can keep them from communicating. So there is 
an energy let loose not just in Arab countries but here in the United 
States that says, America, we've got to live within our budget. You're 
not going to tax us anymore.
  Madam Speaker, I think we've got to remember that the American people 
saw this coming. They saw starting in '08 a spending spree of 
extraordinary spending that went off for 2 years. Actually, even before 
the new administration went in there, the American people saw that 
there was going to be spending done by Republicans or Democrats that 
was going to be used as an excuse to raise taxes, and that's why they 
said, We're taxed enough already. So we need to get down to the fact 
that we're talking about where is the credibility of this government. 
It has to be reinstalled by the fact that we can be trusted with the 
budget--not trusted with raising taxes, but trusted with spending 
control. That is going to be the real crisis.
  Notable economist Art Laffer just said recently that he almost 
compares what's being proposed by some in Washington to a couple going 
out to Monaco and then to Italy and then to France and running up a big 
bill and then coming back to their boss and saying, Oh, by the way, 
Boss, we spent all this money. We need a pay raise--or how about this: 
why don't you split half of the expense of my vacation with me. You pay 
half of it and I'll pay half of it.
  That kind of logic doesn't sell when you're facing off with your 
employer. It darned well doesn't wash when you're facing off with your 
employer here in Washington, which is the American taxpayer, and I 
think we need to recognize that.
  So, in all fairness, there are things we can do, Madam Speaker, to 
stimulate the economy without borrowing money from China. We can bring 
back almost $2 trillion of American money to create American jobs here 
on American soil. Congress and the President just have to agree to do 
it. The money is out there. It's not being taxed, and it's not coming 
back if we don't eliminate the 35 percent penalty for it coming back.
  Here is a place where we can invest in research and development, like 
the President wants, and in construction. We can go into manufacturing 
expansion--things for which the President and the Democrats in the past 
have borrowed money from China in order to create that kind of stimulus 
to the economy. We can create a stimulus to the economy, we can create 
jobs and help to balance the budget, but first we've got to understand 
that taxing people to death is not the answer to prosperity.
  The answer for this family, called the American Nation, is just like 
that of every other family: living within your means, understanding 
your limits, spending within those limits, and not asking people to pay 
for your extravagances.
  So as we face a lot of challenges, I've just got to say to everybody 
that you can look at what's going on in California today. Madam 
Speaker, it is a State that is controlled by the left, that has driven 
business out of the State, and the money now has run out. Not only did 
citizens lose jobs when those businesses left; but because those jobs 
are not there to pay the taxes, the

[[Page H5138]]

citizens of California, who have depended and expected to have their 
health care paid by the State now are being told they have to expect 
less because there is no more money to pay for those social benefits 
that they were promised--promised in such inappropriate ways. As we 
destroy businesses, we destroy jobs. Even those who are on public 
assistance will be affected by this kind of destructive behavior.
  The difference between raising the debt limit today and in the past 
is that, in the past, all you had to do was raise the debt limit to 
have groups like Moody's be able to talk about addressing this issue. 
Fine, that's enough. Now the people who are raiding our dollar are 
saying, You can't just raise the limit. You've got to show us that you 
are serious about controlling the spending. Now this Congress has to do 
something that no Congress has been forced to do in the past:
  We have to address the issue of the debt limit but address the issue 
of the debt at the same time.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the gentleman from California for his 
wise and well-placed words.
  My friends on the left would have us believe that if we have a 
balanced budget in this country that somehow it will crush all of the 
critical programs for the most vulnerable in our society. Madam 
Speaker, that just simply is not true.

  There is very little that I know of that would cause this government 
to flourish economically than for the Nation, itself, to flourish 
economically. Oftentimes, we forget that the confidence in the system 
has a great deal to do with the success of the system. We find that a 
lot of us on the right talk about the competitive free market, and we 
do believe in that; but I will tell you there is something that we 
believe in even more, and that is an element called ``trust.''
  Of those who are the producers of our society, of those who are the 
job makers of our society, of those who are the captains of industry 
and productivity, all the way down to the person who makes minimum 
wage, if they believe that they can trust the environment they're in 
and if they do what they believe is right--that their contracts will be 
honored, that their wages will be paid, that government will make sure 
that they're treated justly and fairly--then they will continue to be 
productive, and they will continue to do everything that they can 
collectively to make this country the ongoing greatest Nation in the 
history of the world.
  Madam Speaker, when that trust is broken--when government sometimes 
just sets aside its own rules and prints money and deficit spends and 
completely ignores the important things that it's supposed to do to 
keep trust with the people that it represents--then oftentimes those 
who are the producers, those who are the entrepreneurs, those who are 
the ones who try to make a difference in this world become discouraged, 
and they step back because they can't trust their government.
  I would suggest to you, Madam Speaker, that that is one of the big 
challenges that we face today.
  People have watched over the last many decades this government 
continue to spend out of control. They've watched us take advantage of 
inflation. They've watched the government of this Nation and its 
leaders use deficit spending to a degree that diminishes their way of 
life, and they've watched us do all the bailouts and all those kinds of 
things. I will just tell you, Madam Speaker, that they're getting 
tired, but the good news is this:
  The good news is that people have finally awakened.
  I would say to you tonight, Madam Speaker, that nothing encourages me 
more than knowing that people are finally starting to watch this 
country. They know that a balanced budget amendment will do something 
that very few other economic policies have ever done: that it will 
restore the confidence and trust in this government, that we will begin 
to have to live within our means, that if we want greater revenue to 
come through these doors that we will do everything that we can to see 
business flourish, and that we will put aside this notion, as Fred 
Bastiat said, of government being that great fiction through which 
everyone endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.
  We will understand that the secret to the success of this Nation 
economically is productivity. Then we will have the kind of tax base 
that will not only support this government but that will allow us to do 
the things that are important for the most helpless in our society.

                              {time}  1950

  I want to yield again to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. BILBRAY. Madam Speaker, we are really at a threshold of making 
decisions of: Are we willing to do what it takes to prove to the 
American people that this Republican form of government actually can 
function and address the long-term needs of America?
  We're at a point to where we have to be able to show not just the 
American people, but to people around the world, that our Republican 
experiment, the Republic that we call the United States of America, can 
function not just for 200 years but for hundreds of years on top of 
that because we can make the tough decisions not just to go to war, not 
just to respond to disasters, but to take care of our financial well-
being and that the elected representatives cannot use tax money to buy 
votes and cannot be bullied by scare tactics away from doing what is 
essential for the future of this country. That is a real test.
  And remember, when we talk about Washington taking money, and I think 
this is one thing Republicans and Democrats don't talk enough about. I 
used to be a mayor. I was a mayor in my twenties. We forget that this 
is not government--and I say this to my Republican colleagues. We say 
that too much. This is not government we're talking about, but this is 
Federal Government. This is totally different than your city council. 
This is totally different than your county commissioners or 
supervisors. This is not going to your school board. There, if they tax 
you, you can go to their meetings and you can stand up at a podium and 
you can tell that mayor what you think about his spending habits. You 
can tell the county chairman what you think. The school board member is 
required, by law, to hear your opinion about that.
  But when your money is taken to Washington, you don't have the right 
to even stand up and speak to the Congress. You try to stand up without 
getting permission, they've got security to drag you off. There is a 
big difference between sending your money to city hall and sending your 
money to Washington, D.C. One, you are vested with rights to 
participate in how that money is spent. Here in Washington, you are 
disenfranchised except for one person, your Congressman. And that 
person darn well is diluted and cannot speak for you personally but has 
to represent you as part of a group.
  So when we talk about Washington taking money, remember you've got 
school boards, you've got counties, you've got cities. But Washington 
is not just taking it away from the business community; it's taking it 
away from the local government agencies that provide the baseline 
services that are essential to all of us.
  We keep talking about Washington is the great safety net. Excuse me. 
Your city and your counties are the great safety net of civilized 
services that we get into. The Federal Government, anybody that's lived 
in Washington, D.C., understands that, that the local government is 
where the essential services have gone. And when we take money out of a 
community and bring it here to Washington, we're depriving those same 
mayors and school board members and county commissioners the essential 
services that make every day possible for our citizens. And when we do 
that, even more importantly, we deprive the individual the ability to 
participate in how their hard-earned money is spent.
  So we should take as little as humanly possible to execute the 
responsibilities and the mandates of the United States Constitution. 
And maybe if we looked around a little more and focused on the 
responsibilities that the Constitution gives us, Washington, D.C., as 
opposed to mayors, council members and State legislators, maybe if we 
didn't try to be everything to everyone, maybe we wouldn't be so greedy 
at taking so much from the citizens of the United States. So I think 
that that is one of those items we've got to constantly try to 
remember.

[[Page H5139]]

  And I say this to my Democratic colleagues and my Republican 
colleagues. When we're talking about the Federal budget, we're not 
talking about government. We're talking about Federal Government taking 
these funds. And I think those are the central issues.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the gentleman from California.
  I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. LAMBORN. I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona for 
sponsoring this time to talk about the importance of having Cut, Cap, 
and Balance. This is an historic vote that we're going to be taking in 
the House tomorrow. And I think that it's critical that we have a 
solution that will get our fiscal House in order.
  Very few of the other people that are negotiating with the House 
leadership--I am talking about the Senate Democratic leadership, the 
White House, they're very short on having specific plans. I haven't 
really seen anything in writing, in fact. I'd love to see something in 
writing so we could actually do a financial analysis, a fiscal analysis 
of one of the other plans. But this is a way forward that many of us 
are looking forward to voting for tomorrow here on the floor.
  And as you have been describing it, Representative Franks and Mr. 
Bilbray of California, the elements of this plan are really wonderful 
for the fiscal health and the financial future and the prosperity of 
our country. America is a great country, and I don't want to see her go 
into decline. And if we don't do something, that is the prospect that 
we unfortunately have before us.
  So I look forward to voting to cut the next year's budget by a 
manageable amount. Sure, there will be some people who say, Don't cut 
this; I'd rather you cut something else. But we have to live within our 
means, so we're cutting from next year's budget.
  We're also capping the next 10 years so that instead of the 
unsustainable 24 or 25 percent spending of our gross domestic product 
for the Federal Government, it's going to be brought down to about 20 
percent or under 20 percent. That is important for living within our 
means.
  Historically, post-World War II, the revenues of the Federal 
Government have been about 18 percent, nowhere near the 24 or 25 
percent. Even 19.9 percent that this calls for after, like, year six or 
seven is still higher than our revenues, but it's on a glide path, it's 
on a trajectory that gets toward balance.

  And the best thing of all is a balanced budget amendment. And this is 
something that the minute, should it pass the House and Senate and go 
to the States and should the three-quarters of the States, 38 of them, 
pass it in their own legislatures and it becomes part of the U.S. 
Constitution, at that moment we will live under a balanced budget, 
whether that's 4 years or 8 years or 12 or however long that would 
take. So this has a short-term, a medium-term, and a long-term solution 
for the fiscal health of our country.
  Now, if others say, Well, I don't like that plan; I'm going to vote 
against it, I'd like to see their plan. The status quo is simply 
unacceptable. We are headed toward a Greece-type default and 
bankruptcy, and we just simply do not need to do that. So we have to 
reduce our spending.
  Representative Franks, you know this as well as I do. I have watched 
and respect your voting record, and you're one for holding the line on 
extraneous spending. And that's what it takes. Every family has to do 
it. Every business has to do it. Every individual has to do it. When 
your income is not as much as your outgo, you have to reprioritize. You 
have to stop spending as much as you want to and you have to live 
within your means. Every other government in the country has to do 
that--cities, States, counties. They all have to do it. The Federal 
Government is, for some reason, the only one that's exempt from these 
fiscal laws of nature.
  So we have this historic vote tomorrow. I'm really looking forward to 
voting to cut, cap, and balance our Nation's finances. And 
Representative Franks, I'm so glad that you are sponsoring this time so 
that we can discuss this important issue.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the distinguished gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to the remainder of the time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 20 minutes remaining.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. With that, I would yield to the gentleman from 
Indiana.
  Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. I thank the gentleman from Arizona.
  Just an observation here. I know our President said earlier today 
that we had--frankly, we don't need a constitutional amendment to do 
our jobs. He was referring, of course, to this debt limit debate and 
our insistence here in the House that we get some serious spending cuts 
in conjunction with that debt limit and come up with a plan to get our 
debt under control in the longer term.

                              {time}  2000

  My response to this idea that we don't need a constitutional 
amendment to do our jobs, first I look to the Constitution itself. 
Article V of the Constitution, the first phrase there is pretty clear. 
``The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it 
necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution.''
  I would say it's our duty, when we deem it necessary, to go ahead and 
propound constitutional amendments to solve various problems here that 
we think need to be addressed within our Federal Government. First, we 
are duty-bound to put forward such a solution. Second, history bears 
out many examples where institutionally or culturally or historically 
the time has arisen for certain improvements in our way of government.
  So we've put forth some fine amendments like, say, the 19th 
Amendment, which gave women the guaranteed right to vote. I think 
that's a fine thing. I think it was important that Congress put forth 
amendments to guarantee women's right to vote so that we would do our 
job. It was necessary. It was necessary to put forth that amendment, 
just as it's necessary to put forth a constitutional balanced budget 
amendment.
  I guess the final thing I would say is it's necessary that we pass a 
constitutional balanced budget amendment as part of this Cut, Cap, and 
Balance Act of 2011 because it's the only viable plan we have on the 
table right now. What is the President's plan to get our budget back 
into balance? I ask that time and again. I have not seen any sort of 
acceptable answer.
  So we need to bind the hands of our political class. I think this 
Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, which my colleagues have been speaking to 
over recent minutes, is a very responsible direction to go, and I ask 
for the consideration of my friends across the aisle as well.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the gentleman from Indiana.
  Oftentimes, Madam Speaker, I have friends that come up to me on the 
street and they say, Trent, why aren't you talking more about this? Why 
aren't you explaining these things in the media better? Why aren't you 
going to the floor and telling us about these critical issues? So, 
oftentimes we do and the media just ignores it or somehow the people 
don't have the advantage of hearing what we say.
  And I hope that doesn't happen to this bill, Madam Speaker, because I 
truly believe if the American people could just read the Cut, Cap, and 
Balance legislation that they would understand how profoundly 
reasonable it really is. All it really says is that we are going to cut 
our budget at least as much as we raise the debt ceiling, and that 
we're going to put some steps in place to begin to rein in the spending 
of this government in a real way; and that as we go forward, we will 
begin to index the spending of this Nation with a certain percentage of 
the gross domestic product, or the amount of productivity of our 
Nation.
  Madam Speaker, that's so imminently reasonable because that creates a 
great deal of incentive on the part of government, then, to see all 
people in our society successful, to see everyone have gain and to be 
able to accumulate wealth in every way that they can, from the janitor 
to the Senator.
  And then, finally, this legislation says that we need a balanced 
budget amendment to our Constitution.
  Madam Speaker, I have the privilege of being the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on the Constitution in this place. I will just suggest to 
you that the balanced budget amendment seems

[[Page H5140]]

so intuitive to me because, as I said earlier, all budgets have to 
balance at some point.
  You know, I have two little babies, Joshie and Gracie, and they have 
piggy banks. They know that if they take more out of it than they put 
in it, then it goes empty. They understand that. I don't know why 
something so fundamental and basic escapes the erudite minds that 
pervade government. But it seems that we think that somehow because we 
have Ph.D.s and that because we are able to perpetrate monotonic 
polysyllabic obfuscation, semantic gymnastics, and verbal 
circumlocution that people won't know what we're talking about and that 
somehow we can get away with anything that we want to. And I just think 
that's so tragic because a reality is still in place that says that if 
we live outside our means, that pretty soon the entire system begins to 
collapse. That's where we are, Madam Speaker. We are seeing people 
losing confidence in their government. And I'm very concerned about 
that because I believe that it is vital that people have confidence.
  Somebody said to me, they said, you know, if all of the gold in Fort 
Knox were stolen tonight and none of us knew about it, that the gold 
market wouldn't change much tomorrow morning in The Wall Street 
Journal. But if someone put out a press release, say, from Fort Knox 
that all of the gold had been stolen in Fort Knox but that that wasn't 
really true, that all of the gold was still there but somehow the 
public believed that it had been stolen, that gold markets across the 
planet the next day would crash because people's perception, their 
confidence in the system is vital to the system.
  Right now, people are losing confidence in our system, and I think 
there are very few things that threaten us more. We talk about a 
default. Well, the default is not going to happen on August 2 unless 
the President chooses to arbitrarily force that to happen. But I am 
concerned that the markets may begin to say, Maybe the Congress of the 
United States just doesn't have the courage to do the right thing. 
Maybe somehow they're going to let politics intervene to the extent 
that they're actually going to step back and not do what's necessary to 
stabilize the economic foundation of this Nation. And that is so tragic 
because it doesn't have to be that way.
  This Cut, Cap, and Balance bill can accomplish everything that's 
reasonable. It can say, okay, we recognize the challenges that we face 
in this country today. We recognize that we've overspent. We recognize 
that our country is at a low economically. We recognize that we're not 
working on full employment. We recognize that the markets don't know 
whether to jump or go blind. They don't know what this President is 
going to do next. And if we put this Cut, Cap, and Balance bill in 
place, all of a sudden, the markets of the world, the person on the 
street, they're going to realize, hey, maybe there is hope after all. 
Maybe America is going to go forward and do what she was destined to do 
from the born of time and continue to be that great city on a hill that 
Ronald Reagan spoke of. I believe that it can be that way.

  But I am afraid that somehow the people won't understand what's in 
this bill. I will just suggest to you, in all due deference and respect 
to the President of the United States, his plan is incumbent upon the 
people not understanding what it is, and the Republican plan is 
incumbent upon the people understanding what is really in the bill. And 
I so hope that the people are able to truly get the information that 
they need to understand what this bill is all about, rather than 
letting the left-wing media distort it to the extent that they don't 
know.
  I also hope for something else, Madam Speaker. I am hoping that 
tomorrow when we vote that we will recognize something else as people 
in this place: that all too soon we will step from these Chambers one 
by one and that our time here will be passed, and only those things 
that we did that truly honored our God and our country and our fellow 
human beings and the great gift that we've been given in America will 
really matter at that point. I hope we will realize that we won't have 
too many votes like this in our career that can make a difference for 
future generations.
  It's been said that the politician looks to the next election; 
whereas, the statesman looks to the next generation, and that great 
societies finally come when old men plant trees under whose shade they 
will never sit. I hope tomorrow that we will embrace this thing called 
statesmanship and look to the next generation and, quite frankly, Madam 
Speaker, to look to the next few days and weeks, because what we do is 
going to send a message to the markets the world over.
  If you are an investor and you saw a company that continued to 
deficit spend and continued to get in debt beyond its means and 
continued to carelessly spend, would you invest in that company? I 
think that's what our country has to ask ourselves.
  I truly believe that we're going to have a chance tomorrow that may 
be very unique in our careers, and it's possible that a lot of people 
are going to succumb to the need to be popular among certain special 
interest groups. But I will just suggest to them, Madam Speaker, that 
popularity is history's pocket change. It's courage that is the true 
currency of history, and we have a chance to be courageous tomorrow. We 
have a chance to do what's right, to stabilize this country today and 
tomorrow. We have a chance to make sure that our future generations 
walk in the light of freedom. I have a chance, as a father, to do what 
I believe is truly right for my children and their contemporaries so 
that they might grow up and walk in the light of freedom, as I have.

                              {time}  2010

  If we do this, I believe the people will applaud us in the long run. 
There may be certain exceptions in the short term. But in the long run 
they will look back and say that those people who stood up and did what 
was right that day when they voted on cut, cap, and balance and voted 
for the balanced budget amendment, they'll look back and see that as a 
historic turning point in this country. And I want so much to see that 
happen.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, I would just say to you again that all 
budgets do balance, and the equation before us today is, are we going 
to balance the budget, or is reality going to balance it in a 
horrifying way for us?
  For the sake of my children, for the sake of future generations, and 
for the sake of all that we love and hold dear in this country, and for 
the sake of making sure that we are good stewards of the greatest 
Nation God has ever given to this planet, I hope we do the right thing 
tomorrow.
  I yield the remainder of the time to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. I thank my colleague from Arizona.
  He said a couple of things that I would like to pivot off of. They 
certainly struck a chord with me. First, the notion that markets deal 
with perception, as opposed to always reality. I thought it was a 
brilliant example of Fort Knox, should the gold be taken, the press 
release versus the actuality of that gold being taken.
  It reminded me of a conversation I had just today on the airplane as 
I headed backed to Washington from my southern Indiana district. I was 
sitting next to someone who dealt in the financial markets, and I asked 
him a fairly pointed question. I said, you know, the media, in recent 
days, in recent weeks, has really sort of ratcheted up attention, even 
anxiety with respect to the debt limit debate and whether or not the 
debt ceiling is, in fact, going to be raised, what is going to be 
attached to a debt ceiling vote.
  And I certainly understand this. I take this vote very seriously and 
have factored into my calculus of voting for and against various 
measures, the interest rate response we might see.
  But the funny thing is there hasn't really been much of an interest 
rate response. For all the hemming and hawing about what might happen 
should we not raise the debt ceiling by August 2, there hasn't been an 
interest rate response. And I find that amazing.
  And so I asked my friend why he thought that was, and he put forth 
one idea. He said certainly, Todd, that these are complicated matters, 
and there are all different things that factor into them. But in his 
professional opinion, one reason was that we finally have a group of 
people in Washington that are taking very seriously this notion we 
ought not spend more money than we bring in. That's pretty powerful.

[[Page H5141]]

  I'm proud, as a new Representative, to be part of this group of 
people supporting the cut, cap, and balance measure that would bring 
our spending under control. So we ought to be proud. That's an early 
victory. The markets, at least, believe we are serious about getting 
this spending under control. I hope we can play this out and prove that 
we are serious.
  The other thing that my colleague from Arizona said that struck a 
chord with me was this notion that statesmen look not just to the next 
election, they look to the next generation.
  There was a group of people back 150 years ago that entered politics. 
It was around the 1850s, and they entered politics certainly looking to 
the next generation. It was their belief that every man, woman, and 
child should be entitled to the fruits of their labor. They weren't 
partisans. In fact, they were Know-Nothings. They were independents, 
some Democrats. They came together with this notion, though, that 
everyone should be entitled to the fruits of their labor.
  Well, when we continue to spend money we don't have, oftentimes on 
things we don't need, and kick the debt forward another year, another 5 
years, another 10 years, another generation or two down the road, 
ladies and gentlemen, we are committing the fruits of the next 
generation's labor to pay off our current debt.
  Madam Speaker, I think this is wrong. I think this cut, cap, and 
balance plan is a viable plan, a specific plan to stop this practice so 
that everyone, my four children, everyone else's grandchildren and 
great grandchildren, will not be paying off our future debts.
  So again, I urge consideration and support of this cut, cap, and 
balance plan. And for those who are unable to support it, I would ask 
them to put forth a specific plan of their own, one that will get our 
spending under control and put this Nation back on the right fiscal 
course.
  Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Madam Speaker, let me just close with these 
thoughts. There are a lot of people that have sacrificed profoundly for 
this Nation. There are people lying out in Arlington National Cemetery 
tonight, and I wonder what their perspective would be if they could 
come back among us for just a few moments?
  While none of us knows that, Madam Speaker, I would suggest to you 
that they didn't die so that we could spend our country into 
bankruptcy, so that we could weaken our Nation on all fronts simply 
because we weren't fiscally responsible. And they didn't die so that we 
could put ourselves so deeply in debt that we spent tens of thousands 
for each little child born today so that they would have to carry that 
the rest of their lives.
  They wanted, as the Founding Fathers talked about, to see every 
person, not only in America but, ultimately, in the world, to be able 
to be born and to lay hold on the miracle of life and to be free and to 
pursue their dreams. That's what they wanted. Sometimes I am so afraid 
that we have gotten away from that vision to the extent that we've 
grown sort of callous and cynical.
  I hope that we can revisit those ideals tomorrow, and that we can 
force ourselves to remember that all of history and all of the future 
is watching us, and that what we do here tomorrow could mean the 
difference for America for decades and generations to come.
  I believe if we do the right thing, that the loneliest moments in an 
old age home will be livable because we'll look back and say, you know, 
that's what we did. We did the right thing. And I hope we do that for 
the sake of my children, for the sake of America's children, and for 
the sake, somehow, of the children throughout the world that can be 
still touched by the message of this, the greatest Republic in the 
history of humanity.
  Madam Speaker, if we will protect our constitutional foundations, if 
we will protect our economic base, if we will protect those things that 
make us who we are, then I believe that this government will have all 
of the revenue that it needs. I believe we will continue and go forward 
to be more productive than we have ever been, and I believe that 
America still has great things in the world to do. I hope we make sure 
that that occurs.
  With that, with great respect, Madam Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.

                          ____________________