[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 109 (Wednesday, July 20, 2011)]
[House]
[Page H5246]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran) for 5 minutes.
Mr. MORAN. Last night, we were asked to amend the Constitution, after
two-and-a-quarter centuries, in a way that will permanently limit the
ability of our government to foster competitiveness in a global
economy, to generate greater equality of opportunity, to treat our
seniors with dignity and respect, and to defend and define this great
Nation as an ever-shining democratic beacon of hope and prosperity.
So I was proud to vote against the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act. It is
the House Republicans' vision for America's future. This is a vision in
which the country turns its back on the achievements of the last
century and chooses not to invest in meeting the challenges of the next
century.
Republicans aim to use a crisis of their own making to hamstring
future Congresses, limiting our ability to make necessary
infrastructure investments, to care for the poor, aged and disabled,
and to respond to national and international crises.
The 18 percent spending cap mandated by the bill would return the
government to spending levels not seen since the establishment of
Medicare and Medicaid. The impending retirement of more than 70 million
baby boomers means that these spending levels are woefully inadequate,
unless we condemn our grandparents to a severely diminished quality of
life.
{time} 1050
The Republican Party would enshrine constitutional protections for
tax cuts and loopholes for wealthy individuals and corporations,
requiring an unattainable two-thirds majority in both the House and the
Senate for the government to increase the currently unsustainably low
revenue levels of roughly 15 percent of GDP.
This would necessarily result in unprecedented cuts in student loans
and grants, transportation, education, environmental protection, law
enforcement--in other words, the physical and the human infrastructure
of our economy.
The only budget plan that comes close to meeting the requirements of
these constitutional amendments is the Republican Study Committee
budget which eliminates 70 percent of nondefense discretionary funding
by 2021, contains deep cuts to Medicare, cuts Medicaid, food stamps,
supplemental security income for the elderly and disabled and poor in
half by the end of the decade, and raises the Social Security
retirement age to 70 years of age.
Yesterday's vote means that the Republican majority is demanding that
in return for avoiding an economically disastrous default on our debt,
we make $111 billion in immediate spending cuts. These cuts seriously
increase the likelihood of a double-dip recession. It is estimated that
they could cause the loss of more than a million public sector jobs
just in the next year alone.
Last month, the economy added an anemic 18,000 jobs; but the private
sector added 57,000 jobs, while 39,000 public sector jobs were lost in
addition to the 49,000 public sector jobs lost in the prior month. This
is a continuing trend. Half a million public sector employees have now
lost their jobs, 200,000 of them teachers, while student enrollment has
increased by 750,000. Firing more government workers will only decrease
aggregate demand, making it that much harder to sustain the recovery.
We have witnessed this before. In 1937, President Roosevelt responded
to similar conservative pressure by substantially reducing Federal
spending before the Great Depression was fully in the rearview mirror.
It drove us right back into economic depression. The economy wouldn't
recover until the increased spending and hiring that accompanied the
World War II armaments buildup got the country moving again. After the
war, spending on education and housing for our GIs, the Marshall Plan
for Europe, and the construction of the interstate highway system
established a permanent middle class and sustainable prosperity.
This is not the time for the Democratic Party to sacrifice our
values, values held by a majority of the American people, even in the
face of opposition that has reached unprecedented levels of ideological
radicalization.
We have to address our long-term deficits for the sake of future
generations, but we must do so in a balanced manner, combining rational
spending cuts and increased revenue. That's what has worked in the
past. That's what we need to do now. We must not abandon the people
that depend upon the government for a decent quality of life, but we
must not let this great Nation become a second-class society and a
third-rate economy. If the bill that was passed last night were to be
enacted into law, that's the limited vision it would yield. That's why
I was proud to vote against it.
____________________